Eddie Howe

[Theregulars]

Just now, astraguy said:

fuck me this is still going,Get a fucking grip like sir bobby all over again stop ruining the good things we have and go tug yourself off ffs or log off for good

Drugs are bad, mmmmkay?

[Vinny Green Balls]

Just now, Theregulars said:

So @Vinny Green Ballslikes this point but not mine? Seems inconsistent.

Not at all, man. He didn't complain over and over about mixed results. Ronaldo and TCD have both said that Howe has a lot of credit in the bank because of what he has done before this. Once again, I think Howe dropped the ball against Liverpool. But I also think your argument about why you don't think he's elite is a pretty weak one at worst, and massively jumping the gun at best. This stance has been clearly outlined by a number of people. I find it a little amusing that you have complained that other people lack nuance in their argument when you are clearly demonstrating that deficiency by not seeing the difference between what Ronaldo has said here and what you've been saying. As I said, willfully obtuse.

[Theregulars]

Just now, Vinny Green Balls said:

Not at all, man. He didn't complain over and over about mixed results. Ronaldo and TCD have both said that Howe has a lot of credit in the bank because of what he has done before this. Once again, I think Howe dropped the ball against Liverpool. But I also think your argument about why you don't think he's elite is a pretty weak one at worst, and massively jumping the gun at best. This stance has been clearly outlined by a number of people. I find it a little amusing that you have complained that other people lack nuance in their argument when you are clearly demonstrating that deficiency by not seeing the difference between what Ronaldo has said here and what you've been saying. As I said, willfully obtuse.

I completely and fundamentally agree that he has so much credit in the bank. I do not in any way want a change. I love Eddie Howe. I just think he's not as good as some other coaches yet and it showed at the weekend. I don't think you can say he's an elite manager yet, the evidence doesn't back it up. He has the potential to be one.

 

I don't think there is a massive disagreement in what he and I said though - we're both saying that he has done magnificently but fucked up quite badly on Sunday. I then went further and said my view is that he isn't elite. 

 

If you can't see that this is not wilfully obtuse, then you don't understand what the words mean. 

[Vinny Green Balls]

2 minutes ago, Theregulars said:

OK - I'm going to try once more. 

 

As I have acknowledged multiple times - he does not have a squad as good as the other teams yet. That does not automatically exempt him from criticism when it's evident that he has contributed somehow to a negative outcome. 

 

Maybe people keep expressing their freedom to disagree because you keep ramming shit arguments down their throat without any space allowed for disagreement with you? A sign that it's not a weak argument is the amount of people in this thread saying that he got it badly wrong on Sunday. 

 

And I don't think I'm coming across like ChatGPT - my arguments are set out and explained in a logical, sequential and analytical way. ChatGPT can't do that. 

 

It's absolutely OK to have your views challenged - try not to get so upset about it. 

 

Another example of someone trying to hide the weakness of their argument...one step below whataboutism.

 

And dude, you only started acknowledging the relative weakness of the team only when a number of posters pointed it out. Up to that point, you totally ignored it. And your argument from that point on has still been weak. Many have said that this is what they consider his first proper fuck up. You are using this as an example of why you don't think he's elite. It's just absurd.

[Theregulars]

It's not remotely absurd - he does not yet have the achievements in the bank to be elite. I'm really confident he'd say the same himself. 

 

I don't follow your point about acknowledgment of weakness of team: is it that by not explicitly stating the same when I made my original point that it somehow renders my argument invalid and precludes me from holding both views at the same time? I have tried multiple times to say I agree, the squad isn't as comparatively good - literally I am recognising your argument and I am saying it's completely valid and true. This isn't the behaviour of a wilfully obtuse person, it's the behaviour of someone engaging you in a conversation about a mutual topic of interest. 

 

Why does it strike a nerve in you so much that I criticise Eddie Howe? Genuine question.

[Vinny Green Balls]

6 minutes ago, Theregulars said:

I completely and fundamentally agree that he has so much credit in the bank. I do not in any way want a change. I love Eddie Howe. I just think he's not as good as some other coaches yet and it showed at the weekend. I don't think you can say he's an elite manager yet, the evidence doesn't back it up. He has the potential to be one.

 

I don't think there is a massive disagreement in what he and I said though - we're both saying that he has done magnificently but fucked up quite badly on Sunday. I then went further and said my view is that he isn't elite. 

 

If you can't see that this is not wilfully obtuse, then you don't understand what the words mean. 

 

If you said this from the outset, there wouldn't have been any argument from me,. But you clearly didn't, and are seemingly now changing the goalposts. You said that you seriously worry about his mixed record against the top managers. If you can happily say that you then could have phrased it a bit better from the outset, then I am fine, because I see no problem with what you said in the first few sentences here.. 

 

Another sign of weakness "Why does it strike a nerve?" when someone is calling you out on something. That's a bit of gaslighting on your part, dude.

 

 

Edited August 29, 2023 by Vinny Green Balls

[Kid Icarus]

Get a podcast you two ?

[Theregulars]

I'm not sure it's moving the goalposts - I still do worry about his record against top managers and in big pressure games, because now we are in that conversation. That's not like lack of recognition of being in the shit recently, it's just that we are in the position we're in now, so isn't it fair to look at things from that perspective as well? Essentially can one not simultaneously believe that (i) he has some improvement to make before he becomes elite and (ii) he is comparatively handicapped by a weaker squad? To some degree I think the weaker squad argument is being overplayed this season (not last).

 

There's literally a TV series on right now where our owners repeatedly say that their ambition is that we become the best team in Europe. I know it's fluff and bollocks, but if we want to be a top tits team (and I really want us to both be a top tits team and be considered a top tits team), then we have to play like a top tits team when the time requires us to. I accept we can't do that all the time, but I maintain that there are some signs which suggest that he isn't elite. 

 

I can see how it would have helped if I said he isn't elite yet, but I'm not sure the situation required me to state that he has a weaker squad in order for the argument to be valid. Is it not enough that it got pointed out and when I got round to reading people's messages the next day I then responded saying yes, that's true? I just don't accept that it invalidates my argument.

 

Anyway, doesn't matter a jot.

[Groundhog63]

Hearing Eddie Howe's set fire to all his back catalogue of training/fitness and tactic disciplines & is just going to screenshot the crack off here. 

[PauloGeordio]

[Ghandis Flip-Flop]

What am I reading in here sometimes man? ??. Man Utd finished above us last season despite their record against the top 9 sides. Did anyone seriously expect us to challenge for the title this year? I certainly didn’t, but I hoped we'd improve on last years results. However, apparently unlike a few on here, I expected that improvement to come from beating the likes of Palace, Bournemouth and the other smaller teams that parked the bus at St James'. 
 

Yes it would’ve been nice to beat Liverpool and City, but those results do not define how our season is going to pan out. And anyone trying to make any significant judgement on the team's ability or our managers potential based on such a small sample of results, needs their heads read. 
 

I'm honestly not sure if some posters genuinely believe what they’re writing, or if they genuinely think it’s the done thing to come out with ridiculous hot takes for hipster kudos or something. I mean I didn’t think I’d ever beat some of the bullshit takes on the likes of Pitchside YouTube and then I read this thread.

[The Prophet]

What is it Howe massively fucked up on Sunday? I don't understand why he has a black mark against him.

[Optimistic Nut]

1 hour ago, The College Dropout said:

1-1 would’ve been disappointing. 1-2 is a crumble. 
 

I rate Liverpool higher than most on here.  But after going 1-0 and then down to 10 men. We should’ve won no excuses. A draw wouldve been bad. Losing is a black mark for Howe and he will know it. 

Aye. 
 

Plenty of credit in the bank.  It’s early but that should be some type of nadir that we will recover from.  After the Brighton game we need to put some W’s together. Winning away at Brighton would be a fantastic start but that’s a free hit for me. 
 

Im behind him 100% as are 99.9% of fans 

 

"Shambles" is getting gubbed by 5 or 6 at home to this lot to the extent where the MotM and keeper kept the score down by at least half, and pissed him off to the extent he realised he had to get out of here.

 

Sunday was disappointing. We should have seen it out, but even though they're not the same Liverpool as 2-3 years ago, they still have a world-class manager and have the resources to hoy on a £70-80m centre-forward on to try and save the game.

 

Howe's brilliant. Fact. And we'll never have another boss like him. Someone who's basically a chilled out entertainer. 

 

 

[KaKa]

Here's a question:

 

If the cup final was 'too big' for Howe, and presumably not so for ten Hag.

 

Then what does ten Hag's 7 - 0 loss to Klopp mean then?

 

Tied for biggest loss in Man Utds history. Against their huge rivals in one of their biggest games every season. 

 

Surely this wouldn't happen to 'big enough' for the moment ten Hag.

[MrRaspberryJam]

4 minutes ago, Optimistic Nut said:

 

"Shambles" is getting gubbed by 5 or 6 at home to this lot to the extent where the MotM and keeper kept the score down by at least half, and pissed him off to the extent he realised he had to get out of here.

 

Sunday was disappointing. We should have seen it out, but even though they're not the same Liverpool as 2-3 years ago, they still have a world-class manager and have the resources to hoy on a £70-80m centre-forward on to try and save the game.

 

Howe's brilliant. Fact. And we'll never have another boss like him. Someone who's basically a chilled out entertainer. 

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

 

[OverThere]

If we don't drop a bollock against the teams in the lower reaches we would automatically improve on last year IMO. We drew a ton of games against some crappy teams.

 

Beating Man C etc is still not where we are at present.

[Optimistic Nut]

3 minutes ago, OverThere said:

If we don't drop a bollock against the teams in the lower reaches we would automatically improve on last year IMO. We drew a ton of games against some crappy teams.

 

Beating Man C etc is still not where we are at present.

 

We lost 5 in 12 against the top 7 last season and only won 3 so it's not like we have many points to "defend" this season and like you say, a helluva lot of draws against the rest of the league. I doubt we'll go another season unbeaten against the bottom 12 again but if we convert more of those draws we could easily improve on last season. 

[Theregulars]

3 hours ago, KaKa said:

Here's a question:

 

If the cup final was 'too big' for Howe, and presumably not so for ten Hag.

 

Then what does ten Hag's 7 - 0 loss to Klopp mean then?

 

Tied for biggest loss in Man Utds history. Against their huge rivals in one of their biggest games every season. 

 

Surely this wouldn't happen to 'big enough' for the moment ten Hag.

I don’t particularly rate Ten Hag. I’m not sure if it’s him or just Manchester United - I believe what Van Gaal says about it being a commercial operation, not a football club. 
 

I don’t think the cup final was too big in and of itself, I think the fact he’d never been there before and probably didn’t truly expect to get there was evident and the team looked a bit lacklustre as a result. Just an opinion. 

[duo]

Subs had nothing to do with us loosing the game. It's ridiculous to suggest otherwise. Liverpool got lucky with a deflection for the first  I mean come on it couldn't have fallen any better for Nunez. And the second Bruno gave the ball away. Take nothing away from the finish. What this has to do with the subs I have no idea. 

[Displayname]

3 hours ago, The Prophet said:

What is it Howe massively fucked up on Sunday? I don't understand why he has a black mark against him.

Dont think he massively fucked up, but I was dissapointed in the intensity of our play. Thought it was really lacking considering we played over 60 minutes against 10 men at home. Seemed like we tried to control and slow the game down. May not be Howe's fault, he did say they were trying to go for another goal and end the game. Perhaps the fault lies more on the players letting the occasion get to them.

 

Or maybe im just wrong.

 

 

Edited August 29, 2023 by Displayname

[duo]

Just now, Displayname said:

Dont think he massively fucked up, but I was dissapointed in the intensity of our play. Thought it was really lacking considering we played over 60 minutes against 10 men at home. Seemed like we tried to control and slow the game down. May not be Howe's fault, he did say they were trying to go for another goal and end the game. Perhaps the fault lies more on the players letting the occasion get to them.

For 80 minutes Howes tactics were spot on. What lost us the game was bad luck, a worldie of a save and some sloppy play. Nothing that Howe has any control over. The fact that Klopp has said this is one of his greatest victories tells you how well we had controlled the game. Just luck wasn't on our side.

[Displayname]

17 minutes ago, duo said:

For 80 minutes Howes tactics were spot on. What lost us the game was bad luck, a worldie of a save and some sloppy play. Nothing that Howe has any control over. The fact that Klopp has said this is one of his greatest victories tells you how well we had controlled the game. Just luck wasn't on our side.

I actually dont think he did any mistakes the last 10 minutes. That last push was always going to come from Liverpool if we hadnt ended the game by then. Doesnt matter if we controlled the game 80 minutes prior.

[The Prophet]

7 hours ago, Displayname said:

Dont think he massively fucked up, but I was dissapointed in the intensity of our play. Thought it was really lacking considering we played over 60 minutes against 10 men at home. Seemed like we tried to control and slow the game down. May not be Howe's fault, he did say they were trying to go for another goal and end the game. Perhaps the fault lies more on the players letting the occasion get to them.

 

Or maybe im just wrong.

 

 

 

 

I don't think he was completely blameless, but it seems the results means some need to assign blame or black marks to individuals, when in truth a catalogue of factors contributed...

 

Howe - Was too passive or reluctant to make sufficient change when Liverpool took control of the midfield.

The players - On-field they seemed  reluctant to get at Liverpool, despite Howe instructing them otherwise.

Individual errors - The second goal was poor from Bruno and Burn in particular.

The opposition - Played really well and rode their luck with ten. Nunez's finish for the first was superb. 

Luck - Botman's interception hitting his back and bouncing off his heel was highly unfortunate. He then went off injured forcing a defensive reshuffle. Similarly Becker's save could have easily smashed the underside of the bar and gone in.

 

It was just the perfect storm of us not seizing the initiative, Liverpool playing as well as they could with ten and some bad luck along the way. We play that scenario out 100 times and we win more times than not. There's definitely things we could have done better but I don't think there's one glaring error in particular which cost us the game.

 

 

Edited August 30, 2023 by The Prophet

[Displayname]

17 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

 

I don't think he was completely blameless, but it seems the results means some need to assign blame or black marks to individuals, when in truth a catalogue of factors contributed...

 

Howe - Was too passive or reluctant to make sufficient change when Liverpool took control of the midfield.

The players - On-field they seemed  reluctant to get at Liverpool, despite Howe instructing them otherwise.

Individual errors - The second goal was poor from Bruno and Burn in particular.

The opposition - Played really well and rode their luck with ten. Nunez's finish for the first was superb. 

Luck - Botman's interception hitting his back and bouncing off his heel was highly unfortunate. He then went off injured forcing a defensive reshuffle. Similarly Becker's save could have easily smashed the underside of the bar and gone in.

 

It was just the perfect storm of us not seizing the initiative, Liverpool playing as well as they could with ten and some bad luck along the way. We play that scenario out 100 times and we win more times than not. There's definitely things we could have done better but I don't think there's one glaring error in particular which cost us the game.

 

 

 

Well i can only criticize what in under the teams control. What seemed to be our gameplan allowed for luck and quality of opposition to play the part it did.

 

Yes we would have won most games out of a 100, but if we had been more aggressive we would have won alot more i think. They were there for the taking being down to 10 men and playing with two subsistute CBs

[Cronky]

8 hours ago, duo said:

Subs had nothing to do with us loosing the game. It's ridiculous to suggest otherwise. Liverpool got lucky with a deflection for the first  I mean come on it couldn't have fallen any better for Nunez. And the second Bruno gave the ball away. Take nothing away from the finish. What this has to do with the subs I have no idea. 

 

And with the first, the ball went in off the post.

 

In football, if you make subs and then lose the game, then the decision is to blame, and vice versa when you win. And if one of your subs actually scores, then it's a stroke of genius. 

 

Managers know their players and their systems, and will spot when someone is tiring much earlier than we do. The knack is to make the decision before the tiring player becomes a problem, rather than afterwards.