Eddie Howe

[Jackie Broon]

9 minutes ago, jonny1403 said:

 

That's a weird way of categorising it given that you've equated matches against West Ham and Villa as the same difficulty as Liverpool and City . You also for some reason think Watford away, a pretty awful team, is debatable but Brentford, a far better team at home is definitely an easy game?

 

A much simpler analysis would be to flag that we had two top 6 teams in the first run and four plus Leicester in the second run.

 

So in your categorisation exactly which are "the easiest fixtures we could have hoped for" if you're not including the other bottom four teams at home in that?

[Jackie Broon]

12 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

 

Leeds and Southampton at home and Watford away were very winnable fixtures.

 

Yes, but so were Brentford, Norwich and Watford at home.

 

Again, what I was responding to was an assertion that the start to the season (specifically the first 10 but I've only included Bruce's) was "apart from 1 or 2 were the easiest fixtures we could have hoped for". That just doesn't line up with reality, the first 10 games were not significantly 'easier' than the following 10, if anything the following 10 have included more of the 'easier' fixtures.

 

 

Edited January 21, 2022 by Jackie Broon

[jonny1403]

12 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said:

 

So in your categorisation exactly which are "the easiest fixtures we could have hoped for" if you're not including the other bottom four teams at home in that?

 

No, you're right, technically the fixtures were not the easiest possible fixtures that could have been generated ffs 

 

The point was that they were certainly easier than the next ten, and I stand by that.

[andyc35i]

Regardless of the fixtures so far and who was managing the team, I think we should have at least 8 more points than we currently have. I mean some games really stick out to me where we should have taken three points. That stoppage time goal against Southampton (I know they were far better than us), all the easy chances we missed at Watford and the 88th minute equaliser against them at home, and the ASM open goal chance against Man Utd - I just don’t think we have had any real rub of the green this year. I guess we wasted it all last season 

[The Prophet]

1 minute ago, Jackie Broon said:

 

Yes, but so were Brentford, Norwich and Watford at home.

 

Again, what I was responding to was an assertion that the start to the season (specifically the first 10 but I've only included Bruce's) was "apart from 1 or 2 were the easiest fixtures we could have hoped for". That just doesn't line up with reality, the first 10 games were not significantly 'easier' than the following 10, if anything the following 10 have included more of the 'easier' fixtures.

 

 

 

 

Fair enough

 

No games are easy when you're chronically undercoached and fitness levels drop after the hour mark.

 

There's definitely no excuses for last weekend, but he'd been here for five minutes pre-Brentford and missed the match through COVID. Then Norwich we were down to ten after ten minutes, though you could argue its partially his fault for selecting Clark. He hasn't had much luck, that's for sure.

[Consortium of one]

What hurt us during that tough stretch was that the team collapsed late and we were losing 4-1 or 3-1 instead of 2-1.  Our goal differential ballooned.

[Jackie Broon]

 

14 minutes ago, jonny1403 said:

 

No, you're right, technically the fixtures were not the easiest possible fixtures that could have been generated ffs 

 

The point was that they were certainly easier than the next ten, and I stand by that.

 

They just weren't. The average current league position on the first 10 teams we played = 9.5, the next 10 = 10.4

First 10 - 5 home 5 away, next 10 - 6 home 4 away.

First 10 - 3 games against current top 6, next 10 3 games against current top 6.

 

Ok, we have undeniably had are two most difficult fixtures so far back to back in the latter 10, but then we've also had the three easiest. 

 

By every objective measure there's either very little difference between the sets of fixtures, or that the latter set were a bit easier. 

 

I'm sure you will stick to saying that there were "certainly easier", that's how the internet debates go, and I accept it's really a subjective thing, but I can't see anything to objectively back up what you are saying.

 

 

[Guest HTT II]

There is no guarantee even Rafa would keep us up, the issue with Howe’s results is that we aren’t winning any really, and although draws are better than losses, we need wins. Rafa would be similar, more draws than wins with this current team. We have to let Howe ride the season out and if we do go down which I think is guaranteed, he then needs at least half a season in the Championship. I think Howe would take this current team up from the Championship. Rafa is over, we need to get over it too. 

[Happinesstan]

11 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said:

 

 

They just weren't. The average current league position on the first 10 teams we played = 9.5, the next 10 = 10.4

First 10 - 5 home 5 away, next 10 - 6 home 4 away.

First 10 - 3 games against current top 6, next 10 3 games against current top 6.

 

Ok, we have undeniably had are two most difficult fixtures so far back to back in the latter 10, but then we've also had the three easiest. 

 

By every objective measure there's either very little difference between the sets of fixtures, or that the latter set were a bit easier. 

 

I'm sure you will stick to saying that there were "certainly easier", that's how the internet debates go, and I accept it's really a subjective thing, but I can't see anything to objectively back up what you are saying.

 

 

Is it not more relevant where those teams were at the time we played them? A lot of those teams have climbed the table after playing us [obviously the three points we gifted them helped]

[Guest HTT II]

2 minutes ago, POOT 2.0 said:

I was admittedly (at the time) gutted with Howe. But from his first press conference...I was sold. I love the idea of a healthy NUFC playing under his ethos. It could be very exciting and his first game seemed to hint at it. 

 

But to deny he hasn't struggled is daft. He's had an unimpressive effect on the team as a whole. Although, Joelinton has been a cracking distraction. 

 

However, I'll remain behind him until the end of the season and see where we are. Changing now would be suicide.

 

As a side note...I'm getting increasingly irritated at the club and HW constantly asking for our support. Our support has been there at very high levels during very low points. Feels like they're not listening. They have our support...now we need their effort. 

Probably where I stand, although I was happy enough with Howe given the contenders or lack of. The Improvements I’ve seen is in the fitness, but that should be expected, we try to work the ball more and we are more of a goal threat, but it’s all marginal from the football under Bruce. I know he’s a methods man like Rafa, so it will take longer for him to have a real impact and for the team to start clicking, but we need that to happen ASAP now and although the lack of quality and options isn’t helping, sometimes you’ve got to be pragmatic and just play a certain way that fits what you have to play with until you can get new additions in. 

[Jackie Broon]

2 minutes ago, Happinesstan said:

Is it not more relevant where those teams were at the time we played them? A lot of those teams have climbed the table after playing us [obviously the three points we gifted them helped]

 

If you want to work that one out, be my guest.

[Happinesstan]

19 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said:

 

If you want to work that one out, be my guest.

West Ham was 1st game so all twenty teams were tied. On zero points. No telling where WHam were.

Villa were on zero points similar to ourselves but a tighter goal difference would lead me to believe they are in a similar position, now to what they were at the time.

Southampton had 1 point and were probably worse than they are now.

Man U is Man U.

Leeds were probably about the same

Watford may have been a bit better

Wolvs are 8th and came with 6 points so probably 10-12th

Spurs are currently 5th but we believed they were beatable at the time.

 

Can't work it out without relevant data but at a guess I'd say that brings the average positions down [or should that be up?] a little.

My main point is that it's not really a reliable metric by which to make such judgements, which I thought you yourself were alluding to.

 

 

Edited January 21, 2022 by Happinesstan

[jonny1403]

49 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said:

 

 

They just weren't. The average current league position on the first 10 teams we played = 9.5, the next 10 = 10.4

First 10 - 5 home 5 away, next 10 - 6 home 4 away.

First 10 - 3 games against current top 6, next 10 3 games against current top 6.

 

Ok, we have undeniably had are two most difficult fixtures so far back to back in the latter 10, but then we've also had the three easiest. 

 

By every objective measure there's either very little difference between the sets of fixtures, or that the latter set were a bit easier. 

 

I'm sure you will stick to saying that there were "certainly easier", that's how the internet debates go, and I accept it's really a subjective thing, but I can't see anything to objectively back up what you are saying.

 

 

 

As people have already mentioned to you, it's absolutely pointless looking at their current league position now, given that the likes of Wolves and Villa are completely different teams now (and currently much higher up the leage) to what they were when we played them. To be honest I still don't know why you are trying to apply this metric when it's obviously a pretty worthless exercise.

 

The objective fact is that we have played 6 of last season's top 8 under Howe, and 2 under Bruce. 

[Happinesstan]

Just now, jonny1403 said:

 

As people have already mentioned to you, it's absolutely pointless looking at their current league position now, given that the likes of Wolves and Villa are completely different teams now (and currently much higher up the leage) to what they were when we played them. To be honest I still don't know why you are trying to apply this metric when it's obviously a pretty worthless exercise.

 

The objective fact is that we have played 6 of last season's top 8 under Howe, and 2 under Bruce. 

They are also different teams to the ones that finished top 6 last year. The only objective fact is that this debate has no objective facts.

[TRon]

2 minutes ago, Happinesstan said:

They are also different teams to the ones that finished top 6 last year. The only objective fact is that this debate has no objective facts.

 

It's a pretty pointless debate tbh, why do you need metrics to determine we aren't that good? Is it going to make Bruce any better in hindsight? Is it going to mean Howe must be rubbish based on his results after 10 games? 

[Away Toon]

You don't need metrics to know that Bruce was shit and so far Howe is shit.

[Happinesstan]

8 minutes ago, Away Toon said:

You don't need metrics to know that Bruce was shit and so far Howe is shit.

Yep, nor do we need metrics to tell us Bruce was never improving. Though there are plenty available.

[HaydnNUFC]

16:33 onwards. Good watch and fair points made.

 

 

[wyn davies]

Listened to Talksh*te this morning, had on interview with Eddie Howe , was questioned about transfers, he stated that we have got two in and were looking at getting others, but if we don't then we are where we are, I gained the distinct impression he has more or less gave up as he mentioned that half the team had been there a long time and were good enough to get us out of trouble, kept on going about how moral was high etc etc , I'm not so sure.

[TRon]

2 minutes ago, wyn davies said:

Listened to Talksh*te this morning, had on interview with Eddie Howe , was questioned about transfers, he stated that we have got two in and were looking at getting others, but if we don't then we are where we are, I gained the distinct impression he has more or less gave up as he mentioned that half the team had been there a long time and were good enough to get us out of trouble, kept on going about how moral was high etc etc , I'm not so sure.

 

I watched the same interview, he looked like the transfer business was frustrating him, but some things were out of his hands, which is true. I think what he said about the current bunch of wankers who are playing for us was just to keep them onside. He isn't in a position to do anything else. 

[The Prophet]

25 minutes ago, HaydnNUFC said:

16:33 onwards. Good watch and fair points made.

 

 

 

Really good analysis that.

[Dr Jinx]

20 minutes ago, wyn davies said:

Listened to Talksh*te this morning, had on interview with Eddie Howe , was questioned about transfers, he stated that we have got two in and were looking at getting others, but if we don't then we are where we are, I gained the distinct impression he has more or less gave up as he mentioned that half the team had been there a long time and were good enough to get us out of trouble, kept on going about how moral was high etc etc , I'm not so sure.

That’s simply not to shit on the players who are going to be playing against Leeds. He’s not stupid.

 

He repeatedly said it in the press conference too about the most important players being the ones already there.. trust me, he’ll replace every single one of them given time.

 

Once Thursday afternoon passed by with no major progress, they’ll have backed off.. if they can agree a few deals after the weekend would be way better to bed them in before the next game rather then the mayhem of the Leeds match?

[Mcfc ok]

Having watched various city teams go up and down and down again over the last 35 years I really don't know what to make of your predicament at the moment. 

Just keep the faith it will all work itself out over the next few years with your new owners. 

When you're fighting relegation absolutely fuck all seems to go right but when your chasing promotions everything seems to fall into place. 

All the best for the rest of the season and I hope you stay up.

[Hanshithispantz]

2 hours ago, HaydnNUFC said:

16:33 onwards. Good watch and fair points made.

 

 

Saying he wouldn't play Joelinton though 

 

Absolutely insane. Not sure why people haven't clicked on that Joelinton doesn't need to be getting into the box.

 

 

Edited January 21, 2022 by Hanshithispantz

[Mattoon]

3 minutes ago, Hanshithispantz said:

Saying he wouldn't play Joelinton though 

 

Absolutely insane. Not sure why oeople haven't clicked on that Joelinton doesn't need to be getting into the box.

 

On the contrary, I think the argument should be Joe shouldn't be anywhere near the box, he's powder puff in front of goal.