Dan Burn

[The College Dropout]

Eddie loves Burn deeply.  Burn has never sat on the bench in any meaningful game for Eddie. 
 

So far either Burn starts at Cb in an 3 or a 4 or he starts at LB.  I don’t believe Howe would sit Burn on the bench and then start Schar, Botman and Thiaw. 
 

[Loki679]

We got no young lads that could come in at LB for a few games?

[madras]

14 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Eddie loves Burn deeply.  Burn has never sat on the bench in any meaningful game for Eddie. 
 

So far either Burn starts at Cb in an 3 or a 4 or he starts at LB.  I don’t believe Howe would sit Burn on the bench and then start Schar, Botman and Thiaw. 
 

I think he woukd now if Hall were fit.

[Funtime Frankie]

7 minutes ago, loki679 said:

We got no young lads that could come in at LB for a few games?

Alex Murphy could do but even against Bradford in the cup he only got a few minutes so no faith from Eddie in his ability 

[The College Dropout]

12 minutes ago, madras said:

I think he woukd now if Hall were fit.

Maybe. But to my knowledge he’s never dropped Burn. In 3.5 seasons. 

[madras]

Just now, The College Dropout said:

Maybe. But to my knowledge he’s never dropped Burn. In 3.5 seasons. 

A lot of that could be circumstance as much as choice. Botman and Hall being injured a hell of a lot

[The College Dropout]

1 minute ago, madras said:

A lot of that could be circumstance as much as choice. Botman and Hall being injured a hell of a lot

Aye but on the occasions Botman and Livra/Hall have been fit.  It’s been Botman on the bench or a back 5.  
 

The back 5 is majorly about getting Botman & Burn in the same side plus a proper fullback. The only time we’ve played a back 5 without Botman was Bournemouth I think. 
 

There’s zero evidence Howe will drop Burn.  Howe didn’t even drop Burn when he was getting toasted week in week out. 

[madras]

1 minute ago, The College Dropout said:

Aye but on the occasions Botman and Livra/Hall have been fit.  It’s been Botman on the bench or a back 5.  
 

The back 5 is majorly about getting Botman & Burn in the same side plus a proper fullback. The only time we’ve played a back 5 without Botman was Bournemouth I think. 
 

There’s zero evidence Howe will drop Burn.  Howe didn’t even drop Burn when he was getting toasted week in week out. 

That was when Livra and Hall were very new here.

 

Burn will get rotated this season injuries permitting

 

 

[Kid Icarus]

1 hour ago, Pilko said:

 

Eddie would have went Burn LB ahead of Targett anyway even if he had stayed and was fully fit IMO. 

And rightly so tbh

 

Only alternative I see for us that could improve things is Trippier left back, Thiaw right back and Burn and Botman in the middle.

[The College Dropout]

10 minutes ago, madras said:

That was when Livra and Hall were very new here.

 

Burn will get rotated this season injuries permitting

 

 

I don’t mean rotated the way Bruno might be rotated. I mean - sat down as others are deemed better. Dan Burn is in the Bruno bracket for Howe based on evidence.  
 

My main point is I don’t expect Dan Burn to sit on the bench while Tino and Hall are out in the league or CL. He’s playing some form of left back for the foreseeable. 

[madras]

4 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

I don’t mean rotated the way Bruno might be rotated. I mean - sat down as others are deemed better. Dan Burn is in the Bruno bracket for Howe based on evidence.  
 

My main point is I don’t expect Dan Burn to sit on the bench while Tino and Hall are out in the league or CL. He’s playing some form of left back for the foreseeable. 

I dont think he would have had Botman been fit season before last (champs league season) he'd have been rotated and then the choice would have been for the bigger games. 

 

Your "evidence" is skewed by how often and for how long Botman and Hall have been injured.

[The College Dropout]

Burn has been supreme at CB in Botmans absence.  
 

I personally think the team is better with Burn at CB defensively.  Burn has intangibles I think Howe recognises which is why he always plays somewhere. 
 

Like I said - my main point is I don’t think Burn is about to miss any games of consequence. 
 

Id be pleasantly surprised to see Thiaw at LB and Burn on the bench in a big game but it’s not worth speculating for me 

[IndonesianToon]

When will tino back to the squad ?

[Fenham Mag]

Anyone got a video of his volley?

[huss9]

7 minutes ago, Fenham Mag said:

Anyone got a video of his volley?

hoofoot

[Rod]

5 hours ago, huss9 said:

hoofoot

He's only asking.

[Cornah]

Top 5 value for money signings in last century.

1. Dan Burn

2.Dan Burn.

3.Robert Lee

4.Dan Burn

5.Dan Burn.

fuckin class passion and drive,love him.

[Coffee_Johnny]

7 hours ago, Cornah said:

Top 5 value for money signings in last century.

1. Dan Burn

2.Dan Burn.

3.Robert Lee

4.Dan Burn

5.Dan Burn.

fuckin class passion and drive,love him.

Love them both but in at Number 1 (like forever….) it’s the £15,075 per game it has cost us (transfer fee only obvs) for the glory of having the handsome chunk of Swiss granite (not that one…) Fabian Lukas Schär represent us 199 times ( £167,000 for each of his 18 goals 🤷‍♂️)  Christ knows how many goals he has prevented. 
 

Wor Dan is ‘ridiculously’ expensive in comparison, costing £98,484 per game (6.5 times as much). 
Bobby Lee cost £700,000 in 1992. The British transfer record was £3.6 that year (Shearer to Blackburn) so percentage wise Lee cost (19.4% of that) which (using £125m current Voldemort record) is £24m in today’s money (dodgy formula I know, it would have been more—£40-50m probs) but that lower figure still means he is nowhere near Fabby’s value for money, coming in as a better deal than Dan B, at £79,208 per game but still nowhere near the main man. 
 

You know when you sometimes have a moment of clarity and think wtf am I doing with my time (and my coffee is now cold) well that’s me right now. You’re welcome/I apologise delete as appropriate. 

[Checko]

5 minutes ago, Coffee_Johnny said:

Love them both but in at Number 1 (like forever….) it’s the £15,075 per game it has cost us (transfer fee only obvs) for the glory of having the handsome chunk of Swiss granite (not that one…) Fabian Lukas Schär represent us 199 times ( £167,000 for each of his 18 goals 🤷‍♂️)  Christ knows how many goals he has prevented. 
 

Wor Dan is ‘ridiculously’ expensive in comparison, costing £98,484 per game (6.5 times as much). 
Bobby Lee cost £700,000 in 1992. The British transfer record was £3.6 that year (Shearer to Blackburn) so percentage wise Lee cost (19.4% of that) which (using £125m current Voldemort record) is £24m in today’s money (dodgy formula I know, it would have been more—£40-50m probs) but that lower figure still means he is nowhere near Fabby’s value for money, coming in as a better deal than Dan B, at £79,208 per game but still nowhere near the main man. 
 

You know when you sometimes have a moment of clarity and think wtf am I doing with my time (and my coffee is now cold) well that’s me right now. You’re welcome/I apologise delete as appropriate. 

Now do Lloyd Kelly

[Newcastle Fan]

8 hours ago, Cornah said:

Top 5 value for money signings in last century.

1. Dan Burn

2.Dan Burn.

3.Robert Lee

4.Dan Burn

5.Dan Burn.

fuckin class passion and drive,love him.

 

Fabian Schar came her for something like 3m didn't he?

[Checko]

Suppose Burn is taller so you get more for your money.

[Fak]

8 hours ago, Cornah said:

Top 5 value for money signings in last century.

1. Dan Burn

2.Dan Burn.

3.Robert Lee

4.Dan Burn

5.Dan Burn.

fuckin class passion and drive,love him.

 

In no specific order:

Shay Given, Dan Burn, Trippier, Fabian Schar, Solano

[Lish007]

2 hours ago, Coffee_Johnny said:

Love them both but in at Number 1 (like forever….) it’s the £15,075 per game it has cost us (transfer fee only obvs) for the glory of having the handsome chunk of Swiss granite (not that one…) Fabian Lukas Schär represent us 199 times ( £167,000 for each of his 18 goals 🤷‍♂️)  Christ knows how many goals he has prevented. 
 

Wor Dan is ‘ridiculously’ expensive in comparison, costing £98,484 per game (6.5 times as much). 
Bobby Lee cost £700,000 in 1992. The British transfer record was £3.6 that year (Shearer to Blackburn) so percentage wise Lee cost (19.4% of that) which (using £125m current Voldemort record) is £24m in today’s money (dodgy formula I know, it would have been more—£40-50m probs) but that lower figure still means he is nowhere near Fabby’s value for money, coming in as a better deal than Dan B, at £79,208 per game but still nowhere near the main man. 
 

You know when you sometimes have a moment of clarity and think wtf am I doing with my time (and my coffee is now cold) well that’s me right now. You’re welcome/I apologise delete as appropriate. 

 

Yes but have you taken inflation into consideration..? 

[madras]

2 hours ago, Fak said:

 

In no specific order:

Shay Given, Dan Burn, Trippier, Fabian Schar, Solano

KK ?

[Coffee_Johnny]

1 minute ago, Lish007 said:

 

Yes but have you taken inflation into consideration..? 

Selectively to support my argument. I use statistics the way a drunk uses a lamp post, for support not illumination 😉