Eddie Howe

[lovejoy]

9 minutes ago, Shearergol said:

 

No, really??

 

 

😂

[Toon1892]

29 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

I've never claimed we should be top 4 or anything like that so these are all irrelevant questions.

 

Yes he is unproven as an elite-level coach. His highest achievement in the professional game is finishing 4th and a league cup final. His first season with European football led to a collapse in league form.

 

Where's your proof of the bolded? In terms of position, I don't even think that was true under Ashley. Our wage bill would've been around 11th/12th highest in the league. After January last season, our net spend was top 5 in Europe since the takeover. Read this thread - our expenditure to the 2023 accounts is consistently high across wages, amortisation costs. Squad cost = 7th. Wages = 7th. To finish 4th last season, excellent job. We did very well to finish above Spurs & Liverpool (considering Chelsea weren't competitive). If we finish 9th or lower this season... it's a bad season.

 

https://x.com/KieranMaguire/status/1762492756830888268?s=20

 

I expect us to finish 7th/8th because i think we have good players and a good manager. The fixtures are favourable and we are getting players back. Confidence seems shot and the system broken which makes me anxious.

 

And as I've said repeatedly - I don't hold Eddie solely account for successes or failures. The squad and the leadership are also responsible. We did so well last season because everything went in our favour. The transfers were excellent, the coaching was excellent, lucky with injuries. This year, the transfers have been a mixed bag, unlucky with injuries, the coaching has been exposed at times etc.

 

 

 

I’m not sure everything went our way last season. We had the 4th highest injuries in the league. Often to key players such as Isak and Wilson. (Key last year). https://www.planetfootball.com/quick-reads/premier-league-injury-table-22-23-liverpool-chelsea-arsenal-man-utd
 

We also had some unfortunate suspensions at key times to Pope and Bruno. 
 

If Isak and Wilson weren’t coming back from injury slightly out of form we would have won that cup final.

 

Proof of bold- I’m a chartered accountant so I just looked at the accounts. But a quick summary which isn’t entirely accurate but still demonstrates the points- https://www.givemesport.com/premier-league-wage-bill/

You shouldn’t really look at net spend since the takeover. That only compensated for the lack of net spend under Ashley. As a chartered accountant, the far better measure is gross wage costs to compare budget to budget.

 

The bottom line is Howe has done an incredible job since he took over. I don’t believe there would have been many managers to have been able to do what he has done.

 

Unfortunately fans then set their expectations based on the amazing work he’s done. We’re now back in line this season with our gross wage ranking. (Still pretty amazing given the amount of injuries and fixtures and suspensions we’ve had this season).

 

Stay patient and keep the faith…

[Toon1892]

1 minute ago, Toon1892 said:

I’m not sure everything went our way last season. We had the 4th highest injuries in the league. Often to key players such as Isak and Wilson. (Key last year). https://www.planetfootball.com/quick-reads/premier-league-injury-table-22-23-liverpool-chelsea-arsenal-man-utd
 

We also had some unfortunate suspensions at key times to Pope and Bruno. 
 

If Isak and Wilson weren’t coming back from injury slightly out of form we would have won that cup final.

 

Proof of bold- I’m a chartered accountant so I just looked at the accounts. But a quick summary which isn’t entirely accurate but still demonstrates the points- https://www.givemesport.com/premier-league-wage-bill/

You shouldn’t really look at net spend since the takeover. That only compensated for the lack of net spend under Ashley. As a chartered accountant, the far better measure is gross wage costs to compare budget to budget.

 

The bottom line is Howe has done an incredible job since he took over. I don’t believe there would have been many managers to have been able to do what he has done.

 

Unfortunately fans then set their expectations based on the amazing work he’s done. We’re now back in line this season with our gross wage ranking. (Still pretty amazing given the amount of injuries and fixtures and suspensions we’ve had this season).

 

Stay patient and keep the faith…

On this- unless we have bad management at some point we are likely to remain around the league table position of our gross salary spend. We can’t hope for manager miracles every season. It isn’t sustainable or realistic.

 

The board will know this hence why Howe’s position is safe.

 

The only way to break the top 4 consistently is to up the wages but as you know we are currently restricted due to ffp.

 

A new manager isn’t suddenly going to get more out of Ritchie, Dummet, Lascelles, Krafth etc than Howe has.

 

The wider squad, including the bulk of the academy (which wasn’t invested in for 15 years) just isn’t there yet. As a fan base we have to understand this and be patient. 

[The College Dropout]

22 minutes ago, Shearergol said:

 

No, really??

 

 

This is free baby.

 

@Toon1892

 

"The wage bills for each club come via FBref, with estimates coming from Capology. In the case of some clubs also, there is limited data out there, meaning some of the figures given are estimates. So, with that being said, GIVEMESPORT have taken a look at the annual wage bills of each Premier League club in order from lowest to highest."

 

These are estimates from Capology.
"Where does Capology get salary data? We source salary data from all over the web, news, social, industry experts, and a network of sources who help us verif.."

 

So based on unreliable data.

 

Kieran gets his data from football clubs official financial accounts. Kieran's data is more reliable than GIVEMESPORT. As an accountant, you should know that.

 

Injuries: Nick Pope played every league game until we confirmed 4th. Bruno G played 40 games last season, 32 in the league. Joelinton 32,  Trippier 38, Burn 38, Botman 36, Schar 36, Willock 35, Almiron 34. We had at least 1 fit of Wood, Isak & Wilson all season and the latter two for the entirety of the run-in.

 

Transfers: Yes net spend doesn't account for the fact we didn't have much saleable assets under Ashley. But we still spent £400m on a squad that had finished 11th-13th the previous 4 seasons. Took a midtable wage budget into the top 7. If you spend £400m well on Wolves + a good manager - they'll compete for Europe too.

 

Again - Howe has done excellently. But we have spent a lot of money on both fees and wages. Like... a lot.

[Toon1892]

Final point on this because I’m probably boring people to death. 
 

Net spend is irrelevant when comparing a clubs expenditure. Given it is never adjusted for inflation. 
 

Net spend is a measure used by the top clubs to stay at the top. If the league was truly fair you would allow the clubs below the top teams to spend to catch up.

 

The only true measure the league could bring in would be to have a salary cap. The same for every club. IE no clubs wage bill is allowed to exceed X million a year. It is then fair for everyone.

 

I understand the teams at the top won’t want this as it would mean the league would become so competitive.

How great would it be though. 20 clubs on an even footing.

 

[Toon1892]

Just now, The College Dropout said:

This is free baby.

 

@Toon1892

 

"The wage bills for each club come via FBref, with estimates coming from Capology. In the case of some clubs also, there is limited data out there, meaning some of the figures given are estimates. So, with that being said, GIVEMESPORT have taken a look at the annual wage bills of each Premier League club in order from lowest to highest."

 

These are estimates from Capology.
"Where does Capology get salary data? We source salary data from all over the web, news, social, industry experts, and a network of sources who help us verif.."

 

So based on unreliable data.

 

Kieran gets his data from football clubs official financial accounts. Kieran's data is more reliable than GIVEMESPORT. As an accountant, you should know that.

 

Injuries: Nick Pope played every league game until we confirmed 4th. Bruno G played 40 games last season, 32 in the league. Joelinton 32,  Trippier 38, Burn 38, Botman 36, Schar 36, Willock 35, Almiron 34. We had at least 1 fit of Wood, Isak & Wilson all season and the latter two for the entirety of the run-in.

 

Transfers: Yes net spend doesn't account for the fact we didn't have much saleable assets under Ashley. But we still spent £400m on a squad that had finished 11th-13th the previous 4 seasons. Took a midtable wage budget into the top 7. If you spend £400m well on Wolves + a good manager - they'll compete for Europe too.

 

Again - Howe has done excellently. But we have spent a lot of money on both fees and wages. Like... a lot.

Did you even read my post? I explained all of that.

[Toon1892]

1 minute ago, The College Dropout said:

This is free baby.

 

@Toon1892

 

"The wage bills for each club come via FBref, with estimates coming from Capology. In the case of some clubs also, there is limited data out there, meaning some of the figures given are estimates. So, with that being said, GIVEMESPORT have taken a look at the annual wage bills of each Premier League club in order from lowest to highest."

 

These are estimates from Capology.
"Where does Capology get salary data? We source salary data from all over the web, news, social, industry experts, and a network of sources who help us verif.."

 

So based on unreliable data.

 

Kieran gets his data from football clubs official financial accounts. Kieran's data is more reliable than GIVEMESPORT. As an accountant, you should know that.

 

Injuries: Nick Pope played every league game until we confirmed 4th. Bruno G played 40 games last season, 32 in the league. Joelinton 32,  Trippier 38, Burn 38, Botman 36, Schar 36, Willock 35, Almiron 34. We had at least 1 fit of Wood, Isak & Wilson all season and the latter two for the entirety of the run-in.

 

Transfers: Yes net spend doesn't account for the fact we didn't have much saleable assets under Ashley. But we still spent £400m on a squad that had finished 11th-13th the previous 4 seasons. Took a midtable wage budget into the top 7. If you spend £400m well on Wolves + a good manager - they'll compete for Europe too.

 

Again - Howe has done excellently. But we have spent a lot of money on both fees and wages. Like... a lot.

Let’s agree to disagree then. If you think it’s sustainable for the 8th highest wage bill to consistently get top 4. I’m not going to be able to convince you otherwise.

[Matt1892]

The logic that we should settle around where our wage bill is in the league, with anything higher being a manager miracle and anything lower is bad management is nonsense.

[Toon1892]

1 minute ago, Matt1892 said:

The logic that we should settle around where our wage bill is in the league, with anything higher being a manager miracle and anything lower is bad management is nonsense.

Why? Over the long term that’s what happens. Welcome to the premier league.

 

Yes we need to increase the wage bill to become more competitive.

 

Generally the teams with the better players finish higher up the table. Generally the better players cost more money on a weekly basis. 
 

It’s how sport works. Sorry to break that to you.

[gbandit]

Battle of 1892

[Toon1892]

11 minutes ago, Matt1892 said:

The logic that we should settle around where our wage bill is in the league, with anything higher being a manager miracle and anything lower is bad management is nonsense.

A prime example is Joelinton.

 

He is one of the best midfielders in the league and wants to be compensated like one of the best midfielders in the league. We can’t afford that yet due to FFP.

 

Therefore it is likely that we will have to sell him and buy a player that isn’t as good as Joelinton but who’s wages we can afford.

 

The wage bill is the key metric amongst any sport finances.

[The College Dropout]

16 minutes ago, Toon1892 said:

Let’s agree to disagree then. If you think it’s sustainable for the 8th highest wage bill to consistently get top 4. I’m not going to be able to convince you otherwise.

You're ignoring what i've said and the evidence I have provided to fit a false narrative of consistently getting top 4.

 

[Toon1892]

This is why the top clubs are bringing in a wages to turnover ratio. To even better their stance as the top 6. Once that is brought in it’ll be so difficult to compete.

[The College Dropout]

15 minutes ago, Matt1892 said:

The logic that we should settle around where our wage bill is in the league, with anything higher being a manager miracle and anything lower is bad management is nonsense.

You have to take other teams performance into consideration. And miracles and bad management are too simplistic and extreme.

 

But fundamentally yes - every club should settle around their wage bill. Significantly higher or lower performance means something extreme has happened at squad, management and leadership level. E.g. it has all gone to pot at Chelsea from the top to the bottom. Same for Everton. We got nearly everything right last season from top to bottom as did Brighton.

[Matt1892]

18 minutes ago, Toon1892 said:

Why? Over the long term that’s what happens. Welcome to the premier league.

 

Yes we need to increase the wage bill to become more competitive.

 

Generally the teams with the better players finish higher up the table. Generally the better players cost more money on a weekly basis. 
 

It’s how sport works. Sorry to break that to you.

There are more intricacies to it than purely the wage bill, for example not every players ability is a true reflection of the wage they earn, as well as some players earning more dependent on age, seniority and their status before joining the club, such as arriving on a free transfer etc.

I don’t think anyone would argue that Everton have a better squad of players compared to Brighton, due to the latter having the superior scouting network that has allowed them to bring in high quality players at a lower cost, yet by your logic Everton being lower than them is down to manager magic.

 

 

[Matt1892]

8 minutes ago, Toon1892 said:

A prime example is Joelinton.

 

He is one of the best midfielders in the league and wants to be compensated like one of the best midfielders in the league. We can’t afford that yet due to FFP.

 

Therefore it is likely that we will have to sell him and buy a player that isn’t as good as Joelinton but who’s wages we can afford.

 

The wage bill is the key metric amongst any sport finances.

Edit your original post rather than quoting the same post multiple times.

[The College Dropout]

1 minute ago, Matt1892 said:

There are more intricacies to it than purely the wage bill, for example not every players ability is a true reflection of the wage they earn, as well as some players earning more dependent on age, seniority and their status before joining the club, such as arriving on a free transfer etc.

I don’t think anyone would argue that Everton have a better squad of players compared to Brighton, due to the latter having the superior scouting network that has allowed them to bring in high quality players at a lower cost, yet by your logic Everton being lower than them is down to manager magic.

 

 

This is true for all clubs. If the quality for £££ ratio is bad, that's because of poor contract management by those clubs leadership. That's Everton, Chelsea. That's a failure.

 

Brighton is one of the best-run clubs in the league top to bottom. So they are exceeding their financial output. If Man Utd used their resources as efficiently, they would be challenging for the CL year-in year-out. What's so hard to understand?

[Matt1892]

Just now, The College Dropout said:

This is true for all clubs. If the quality for £££ ratio is bad, that's because of poor contract management by those clubs leadership. That's Everton, Chelsea. That's a failure.

 

Brighton is one of the best-run clubs in the league top to bottom. So they are exceeding their financial output. If Man Utd used their resources as efficiently, they would be challenging for the CL year-in year-out. What's so hard to understand?

Again, it isn’t a simple case of being 7th regarding wage bill so we should be 7th in the league. In the same was a as saying we have the 7th most expensive squad in the league so should be 7th.

 

there are more factors to it than that, which you have agreed with with your example of Man Utd and Brighton.

[Toon1892]

1 minute ago, Matt1892 said:

Again, it isn’t a simple case of being 7th regarding wage bill so we should be 7th in the league. In the same was a as saying we have the 7th most expensive squad in the league so should be 7th.

 

there are more factors to it than that, which you have agreed with with your example of Man Utd and Brighton.

Yes but my point is over the short term your position can fluctuate from season to season in comparison to your wage bill. 
 

Over the long term there is a clear trend between league position and wage bill.

 

Hence if we want to consistently get into the top 4 we need to increase our wage bill. That goes for all clubs. Brighton included.

 

Our board and owners are well aware of this.

[Dr Venkman]

3 hours ago, The College Dropout said:

So many people regard Howe in a stratosphere that is just unproven. 

Who are these people? And what does this even mean?

[rutland]

Villa doing very well for a minimum spend.

[Toon1892]

4 minutes ago, rutland said:

Villa doing very well for a minimum spend.

They are! Although there wage bill is joint 6th highest in the league (40% higher than ours). They will probably end up finishing 5th? So not too dissimilar to their wage bill. 

[Thumbheed]

1 hour ago, Toon1892 said:

I’m not sure everything went our way last season. We had the 4th highest injuries in the league. Often to key players such as Isak and Wilson. (Key last year). https://www.planetfootball.com/quick-reads/premier-league-injury-table-22-23-liverpool-chelsea-arsenal-man-utd
 

We also had some unfortunate suspensions at key times to Pope and Bruno. 
 

If Isak and Wilson weren’t coming back from injury slightly out of form we would have won that cup final.

 

Proof of bold- I’m a chartered accountant so I just looked at the accounts. But a quick summary which isn’t entirely accurate but still demonstrates the points- https://www.givemesport.com/premier-league-wage-bill/

You shouldn’t really look at net spend since the takeover. That only compensated for the lack of net spend under Ashley. As a chartered accountant, the far better measure is gross wage costs to compare budget to budget.

 

The bottom line is Howe has done an incredible job since he took over. I don’t believe there would have been many managers to have been able to do what he has done.

 

Unfortunately fans then set their expectations based on the amazing work he’s done. We’re now back in line this season with our gross wage ranking. (Still pretty amazing given the amount of injuries and fixtures and suspensions we’ve had this season).

 

Stay patient and keep the faith…

Some fans set their expectations and get riled up when we're exactly on course to achieve those expectations. 

 

 

[The Prophet]

I can't even remember what is being debated.

[Colos Short and Curlies]

3 hours ago, Toon1892 said:

Our wage budget was closer to 20th place than 4th place. That has only happened a handful of times.

 

You've taken the absolute Value rather than then position here haven't you? So we have a wage bill that is £60m higher than Luton but £70m less than Chelsea?

 

I'd prefer to say that we need to outperform 5 teams relative to payroll in order to get top 4 but would need to underperform 9 teams to be relegated. Closer to 4th than 18th.

 

If you take the figures you quoted as being more or less true I'd ignore the Manchester Clubs as they have to pay higher wages just for being City or Manure and I'd ignore Chelsea as they are just plain nuts.

 

Spurs/Villa/Liverpool are the wages that should be sustainable for being competitive in and around the top 4 every year. I think Arsenal have overspent and over the next few years you'll see the 3/4 below them catch up as they stay relatively still