Jump to content

Do you still back Eddie Howe?  

735 members have voted

  1. 1. ?

    • Yes
      117
    • No
      92


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, LiquidAK said:

Classic tadpole to avoid the points he can't argue against and try to poke and prod. You used to be better at this, it's like watching Tripps these days

 

I could pick you apart like a piece of rotisserie chicken, traitor. 

 

I just try not to do it these days. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, timeEd32 said:

That's not what I meant. I'm not saying that if Elanga is terrible it's not Eddie's fault because we didn't have a DoF.

 

But read that quote and then imagine the roles we had various people scrambling to fill. People negotiating with slimy agents with minimal experience. The whole thing was likely a gigantic clusterfuck behind the scenes and who knows what turns out different if it's not. Different could mean many things - different players, same players for different money, same players but sooner, literally anything going better with Isak, etc.

 

It's worth drawing this out a little because (as you say) the suggestion is that our problem lay less in identifying targets and having a general plan of action, more in getting players 'over the line' and carrying that action plan out. That makes sense. By the time of Mitchell's departure we should have known what we were up to in the summer, but his absence presumably left us lacking that bit of nous, experience and flexibility in the market. So what went wrong and what might have turned out differently?

 

Ahead of the summer there was a suggestion that we'd look to do our business early, potentially targeting the PSR window, while at the start of the summer we remained adamant that Isak wasn't for sale. In retrospect I think that by the time summer rolled around, we were expecting to sell Isak and focused on securing attacking replacements. Then we missed out on Joao Pedro, missed out on Ekitike in a way that seemed to upset Isak's camp (in so far as it made Liverpool a more challenging destination) and started to panic. Did we make a decision at some point to start moving ahead with our other targets, potentially above cost, or perhaps even decide to revert to old targets where some of the groundwork had already been done?

 

It's all idle speculation but some of that would make sense to me. It would help to explain our summer, though right now the choices we made do not really seem to be paying off. For me Elanga, Ramsey and Wissa made sense for our system as it was and as it had worked, more or less, for the past few seasons, while Woltemade was a bit of a wild card, presumably a late option who we felt offered more upside given the cost. As it turns out we haven't really adapted to suit Woltemade (or vice versa) and the others have struggled to get up to speed. Instead of trying to double down on what worked in the past in those positions we might have been better, for instance, signing a holding midfielder and a more creative winger.

Link to post
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

That's what the reports say. 

 

Take Hojlund for example. He scored 1 every 3-4 games for us. He won two trophies. We'll be recouping ~65% of what we paid. 

 

Newcastle Online verdict: Flop

 

Chris Wood. 1 goal every 8. Sold for 60% of what was paid. 

 

Newcastle Online verdict: Well he took up good positions despite being absolutely garbage, therefore, not a flop. 

 

Casemiro has cost Man Utd between £119m and £148m over 4 years depending on which reports you believe. 

 

Froggy verdict - worth every penny. Literally no better way you could have spent that money :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, r0cafella said:

No point comparing us to Man united when speaking with Froggy absolutely waste of time. 

 

 

Agreed. 1 in 8 for a £25m striker = not a flop. Waste of time. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fun facts

 

Only three Premier League managers have been in their current jobs longer than Eddie -- Arteta, Pep and Marco Silva.

 

Only nine are younger -- Arteta, Slot, Iraola, Parker, Hurzeler, Andrews, Edwards, Rosenior and Carrick.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

Agreed. 1 in 8 for a £25m striker = not a flop. Waste of time. 

I agree, Wood was a flop he didn't perform however the amount we lost on him was minimal so it's not really worth much discussion. 

 

Plus let's not pretend like you don't take the same approach when discussing your lot. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

I agree, Wood was a flop he didn't perform however the amount we lost on him was minimal so it's not really worth much discussion. 

 

Plus let's not pretend like you don't take the same approach when discussing your lot. 

 

I'll mess about from time to time but I'm well aware we've had a heap of flops. :lol:

 

Casemiro certainly ain't one though. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

I'll mess about from time to time but I'm well aware we've had a heap of flops. :lol:

 

Casemiro certainly ain't one though. 

Casezero. He was utter shite and cost a fortune for donkeys. Now he's painted as the new Figo.

 

 

Edited by Heron

Link to post
Share on other sites

We all knew we overpaid for Wood. I don't think it's fair to call him a flop considering how desperate we were at the time.

Sure he didn't score a lot goals, but did his job as a target man and helped us stay out of what looked like would be a relegation fight. 

Well worth the small loss we took on him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, GideonShandy said:

Only nine are younger -- Arteta, Slot, Iraola, Parker, Hurzeler, Andrews, Edwards, Rosenior and Carrick.


Slot is younger than Eddie? Fuckin’ hell. :lol: 

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Froggy said:

 

Agreed. 1 in 8 for a £25m striker = not a flop. Waste of time. 

 

Such a simplistic view and purposefully ignorant too. Wood wasn't in any stretch of the word, prolific for us, but he created a focal point to play off, held the ball up well and changed our game entirely. We went from relegation certainties to CL form and saved our season. 60% loss or £100m gain from survival?

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Mattoon said:

 

Such a simplistic view and purposefully ignorant too. Wood wasn't in any stretch of the word, prolific for us, but he created a focal point to play off, held the ball up well and changed our game entirely. We went from relegation certainties to CL form and saved our season. 60% loss or £100m gain from survival?

He was worth it just to stop Burnley from scoring goals at the time.  We couldn’t have known then that we’d finish mid-table.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Wood was a flop it’s fair to say. But at least he was part of a winning team and has proven he is a good layer at least. 

Happily we learned our lesson; that a big, slow centre forward who is deceptively good with the ball at his feet will probably be good elsewhere but doesn’t fit into our system 

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Happily we learned our lesson; that a big, slow centre forward who is deceptively good with the ball at his feet will probably be good elsewhere but doesn’t fit into our system 

 

 

Absolutely. I get a bit tired of hearing the Wood talk. He served a purpose, but we kicked on big time once we had Isak as our main striker. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Froggy supports Man United so any opinions we have on them is always going to be overridden by the very same appeal to experience argument that magically disappears when he asserts his own about Newcastle. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The College Dropout said:

Wood was a flop it’s fair to say. But at least he was part of a winning team and has proven he is a good layer at least. 

 

image.thumb.png.4aacbc51a46edc7a80f835dd4bfa6f33.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can be somewhere in the middle of a flop or not a flop. Not every signing can be judged as linear as that.

 

Did Wood score enough goals to justify his price tag? No.

 

Did Wood improve our overall team and play, weaken a relegation rival and support our survival? Yes.

 

It’s a bit like Woltemade at the moment. Has he scored enough goals considering he is new to the league? Yes. Goal or assist every 2 games.

 

Has he improved our overall team and play? No.

 

Therefore to judge him solely on his output, he’s been a reasonable success. But the story is much deeper than that and our league position reflects it.

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...