Paul Mitchell (Sporting Director)

[Kid Icarus]

1 minute ago, KaKa said:

 

Yeah, great they've done well.

 

However, if we overpaid for what they were at the time, ultimately that now led to the PSR situation and losing valuable young talent.

 

Not to mention also restricting what we've been able to do as far as bringing players in the last couple of windows.

 

'Overpaying' at the time is now underpaying with hindsight, in 3 players alone we've signed roughly £275m worth of talent for around £140m. We 'lost' that valuable young talent at a massive profit, meaning we were bailed out of the PSR situation without selling our very best players. It doesn't need to be either/or, it can be both - low fee investments for players that we can sell on, higher fees on players that will improve the team/squad and will massively increase in value. 

 

And for all the lauding of Brighton, their astute buys have so far never got them higher than 9th, whereas we made astute buys that blasted us into the Champions League meaning we could attract better players. 

[AyeDubbleYoo]

3 minutes ago, madras said:

Don't want to name any in particular in case any are on here but some of the 'journalistic' takes on this interview show how little real insight there is in journalists covering NUFC.

Shock

[Kid Icarus]

48 minutes ago, KaKa said:

 

It's funny because I clearly remember the public discourse being we paid too much for a lot of our signings at the time.

 

Thankfully it has all worked out, because they have performed well and actually increased their value for the most part.

 

This should tell you something tbf.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

1 minute ago, Kid Icarus said:

 

'Overpaying' at the time is now underpaying with hindsight, in 3 players alone we've signed roughly £275m worth of talent for around £140m. We 'lost' that valuable young talent at a massive profit, meaning we were bailed out of the PSR situation without selling our very best players. It doesn't need to be either/or, it can be both - low fee investments for players that we can sell on, higher fees on players that will improve the team/squad and will massively increase in value. 

 

And for all the lauding of Brighton, their astute buys have so far never got them higher than 9th, whereas we made astute buys that blasted us into the Champions League meaning we could attract better players. 

This is what I thought we were doing with Guehi TBH. Complimenting some great moves to underrated or unusually available players (Bruno, Isak, Gordon) with a move for someone of proven quality in a position we really need.
 

Felt like just a solid evolution of the plan, of course a shame that we didn’t get the deal done in the end. I think we’re suffering a bit with recency bias and concluding we’ve always spent too much on proven players, which IMO isn’t a fair assessment of the work done since the takeover. 

[Mikky]

28 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said:

 

Man City’s method is an adaptation of the Barcelona sporting method and many others from abroad - the exception with Pep is that the DoF is Peps best friend, the trust is absolute meaning Pep just focuses on the pitch - They are unique in a way plus Pep is a genius 

 

The DoF oversees the sporting operation (purchases, sales, loans, youth, scouting, coaches etc)

 

The manager/coach operates on the training pitch

 

There’s a clear separation of duties - they will often talk over a number of things so the coach is always up to speed with ongoings at the club -  when it comes to buying players - the DoF will have a comprehensive list for the manager to pick, they will discuss the current squad, where they can refresh in a position - I mean the whole concept isn’t rocket science

 

Let Mitchell do his job and let Howe do his and trust me, we’ll do quite well 

[Joey47]

30 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

 

I don't think you can disregard how well they'll done since because it's with that hindsight that we can see how savvy the club's been. 

 

So yes, Wood was too expensive at the time, but then when you factor in what we got back, what he contributed and how he's doing now you can't write that off imo, it's too relevant. 

 

Most thought we overpaid for Gordon, if you asked anyone if we'd sell him for what we thought he was worth when we bought him everyone would kick off. 

I agree with you in part but also when referencing the ‘Newcastle tax’ it’s about us overpaying compared to what other clubs would have paid.

Almost all our signings have turned out to be great value but we still might have overpaid compared to what other clubs would have.

Edit to add that this ‘Newcastle tax’ might be a complete myth but I personally don’t see a problem with publicly setting a precedent that we won’t be taken advantage of in the market.

 

 

 

Edited September 5 by Joey47

[Kid Icarus]

8 hours ago, r0cafella said:

Fair play for fronting up, not having some of those comments mind. 
 

Offering so much Guehi and talking about us overpaying in the past is wild. 

Is it still fronting up if all you really say is that the plan wasn't yours, insinuate that the blame lies with Howe, Ashworth, Staveley, Ghodoussi, and then talk about how it'll be better next time because it'll be your plan?

[TRon]

1 hour ago, SUPERTOON said:

Having read through the interviews again it still feels to me something isn’t quite right between Howe and Mitchell (probably Eales as well). I still think one of them will go before the January window as well.

 

I think there will be some friction because it's pretty much common knowledge that Howe likes PL ready players, and he trusts his current scouting team to provide him with what he's looking for. His job is judged by results on the pitch not profits and losses, so that's totally understandable.

 

Mitchell's remit is different, he has to buy players who will prove an asset further down the line and won't lose value. For that he wants to be able to cast a wider net, and presumably that's what has got him success at previous clubs. Ultimately I think Howe will have to work with this as the PL's FFP/PSR rules make it pretty much mandatory to generate profit or spend less every year.

 

To put it bluntly, I hope Howe will be able to compromise on this as all clubs are going to have to operate this way unless the PSR restrictions are challenged and removed.

[Theregulars]

Perhaps I should explain better. In my line of work, I frequently come across people who are interested in nothing other than money and self-enrichment, with no second thought as to impact on others or even a wider community (such as here). They uniformly speak an American-style business semi-formal and their answers, when drilled down, never provide any useful information. They also instinctively, almost as a reflex, deflect blame onto others when put under scrutiny. They're often not intelligent but have had enough education / work time that they can use longer words and coin some phrases convincingly enough.

 

The interviews I have read with this guy completely remind me of those types of people. To my mind it's fairly clear that he's self-exculpating in that interview, and some of its basic premises don't stand up to scrutiny. It's also not the most intelligent thing to declare in public that your opinion - as an alleged expert in player transactions - is that some of our squad were overpriced. 

 

I read what he's saying as we're going to be spending less and that Howe is under scrutiny because, at board level, last season's finish is not sufficiently excused by injuries and circumstances. 

 

In conclusion, it gives me the creeps, because moneyfucks give me the creeps. 

 

Is that OK?

 

 

Edited September 5 by Theregulars

[SUPERTOON]

26 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

I have mixed feelings about them. Some good stuff in there and some unnecessary bits too.

 

That's why I think a video interview might have been a better format, always difficult to frame these things when you don't know what questions were asked or how the answers were delivered.

Aye, for me some of the stuff he said was bang on and very exciting (need for better scouting, foreign targets etc). I just think the stuff about Howe etc didn’t need to be said publicly.

[Kid Icarus]

2 minutes ago, Joey47 said:

I agree with you in part but also when referencing the ‘Newcastle tax’ it’s about us overpaying compared to what other clubs would have paid.

Almost all our signings have turned out to be great value but we still might have overpaid compared to what other clubs would have.

 

 

We'll never know, but I'm not sure he's not just waffling tbh.

 

On previous occasions when we've felt there was a Newcastle tax, Staveley used to always say that we'd walk away, and we did!

 

There are loads of players we walked away from - Diego Costa, Botman and Isak the first time, Maddison, Diaby apparently.

 

And we've picked up bargains with hindsight too - Chelsea were quoted 70m for Gordon, we got him for 40m. Bruno and Isak were cheap. Trippier for 12m and Pope for 10m are bargains for what they've given us.

 

This is also coming from the person who had us bidding 65m for Guehi, so it's a bit rich. 

[r0cafella]

7 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

Is it still fronting up if all you really say is that the plan wasn't yours, insinuate that the blame lies with Howe, Ashworth, Staveley, Ghodoussi, and then talk about how it'll be better next time because it'll be your plan?

To me yes it is, because most executives close ranks when such failures occur. Also despite the Tai chi impressions he was responsible for carrying out the plan. 

[McCormick]

4 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

Is it still fronting up if all you really say is that the plan wasn't yours, insinuate that the blame lies with Howe, Ashworth, Staveley, Ghodoussi, and then talk about how it'll be better next time because it'll be your plan?

Exactly. He didn’t front up at all; he just deflected, self-aggrandized and made several thinly-veiled power plays. He didn’t come across very well at all imo.

 

Funny how arguably none of our previous windows would be called a categorical failure but the one he was in charge of was. 

[TRon]

2 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

We'll never know, but I'm not sure he's not just waffling tbh.

 

On previous occasions when we've felt there was a Newcastle tax, Staveley used to always say that we'd walk away, and we did!

 

There are loads of players we walked away from - Diego Costa, Botman and Isak the first time, Maddison, Diaby apparently.

 

And we've picked up bargains with hindsight too - Chelsea were quoted 70m for Gordon, we got him for 40m. Bruno and Isak were cheap. Trippier for 12m and Pope for 10m are bargains for what they've given us.

 

This is also coming from the person who had us bidding 65m for Guehi, so it's a bit rich. 

 

He's basically said he was bidding for Guehi because he was working within our current parameters as he'd only been in the job for 7 weeks and trying to deliver the player Howe wanted.

[KaKa]

4 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

This should tell you something tbf.

 

Yeah, I get it.

 

Ultimately though, with better recruitment,  we could have brought in players for less than we did, that could have done just as well. We can't just assume this isn't possible.

 

We saw more of this earlier on. Signing the likes of Bruno and Botman for around £30 million a piece.

 

With where we were at PSR wise, we probably shouldn't have been spending what we did.

 

We were quite fortunate with Minteh and Anderson in the end, but at some point discussions were being had about Gordon, because the situation was so precarious.

[SUPERTOON]

3 minutes ago, McCormick said:

Exactly. He didn’t front up at all; he just deflected, self-aggrandized and made several thinly-veiled power plays. He didn’t come across very well at all imo.

 

Funny how arguably none of our previous windows would be called a categorical failure but the one he was in charge of was. 

My wild take in all this, I think privately the club would love England to come and take Howe. Would allow Mitchell to get his own man in and not look like they have forced him out.

[r0cafella]

1 minute ago, SUPERTOON said:

My wild take in all this, I think privately the club would love England to come and take Howe. Would allow Mitchell to get his own man in and not look like they have forced him out.

That’s wild

 

 

[SUPERTOON]

Just now, r0cafella said:

That’s wild

 

 

I did say it was 😂

[TRon]

4 minutes ago, KaKa said:

 

Yeah, I get it.

 

Ultimately though, with better recruitment,  we could have brought in players for less than we did, that could have done just as well. We can't just assume this isn't possible.

 

We saw more of this earlier on. Signing the likes of Bruno and Botman for around £30 million a piece.

 

With where we were at PSR wise, we probably shouldn't have been spending what we did.

 

We were quite fortunate with Minteh and Anderson in the end, but at some point discussions were being had about Gordon, because the situation was so precarious.

 

I don't think we can criticise our previous spending too much, we had pretty good returns on the pitch on the back of it. But the cold hard facts are we can't continue that road indefinitely because basically we'll end up buying no one as those players will leave for nothing at the end of their contracts, and we'll not be able to spend big again to replace them. Just look at our last couple of transfer windows.

[Kid Icarus]

9 minutes ago, KaKa said:

 

Yeah, I get it.

 

Ultimately though, with better recruitment,  we could have brought in players for less than we did, that could have done just as well. We can't just assume this isn't possible.

 

We saw more of this earlier on. Signing the likes of Bruno and Botman for around £30 million a piece.

 

With where we were at PSR wise, we probably shouldn't have been spending what we did.

 

We were quite fortunate with Minteh and Anderson in the end, but at some point discussions were being had about Gordon, because the situation was so precarious.

 

This is an appeal to ignorance argument though, something no one should waste their time indulging in without any evidence supporting it. Particularly when what we do know has resulted in:

• hugely increased player value
• hugely increased club value
• success on the pitch
• success in the league

There's also a bit of an oxymoron going on here in that Minteh and Anderson bailed us out, one of which was bought for ~£6m and sold for £35m, and one of whom was a successful academy graduate. ie the two things we apparently aren't doing. Imo it's not that we're not doing it, it's that we need to do more of it. 

 

 

Edited September 5 by Kid Icarus

[McCormick]

Spot on.

[Kid Icarus]

7 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said:

My wild take in all this, I think privately the club would love England to come and take Howe. Would allow Mitchell to get his own man in and not look like they have forced him out.

Again, I have to be honest and say that what I'm hearing from Mitchell would make me inclined to agree. Nothing about this sits right at all. 

[junkhead]

3 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said:

My wild take in all this, I think privately the club would love England to come and take Howe. Would allow Mitchell to get his own man in and not look like they have forced him out.

 

Nee way, we're not there at all. Eddie is still the heartbeat of everything, he has hired more than 30 staff around the first team. His position is still key and influential. They'll work as a team and they'll be professional like every other fucker on earth does daily in his job. Anything else will be completely amateurish and we're not that club anymore. 

[Menace]

Hypothetically though, and not something I personally want.. who could Mitchell bring in that achieves more than what Howe has done with this team

[Kid Icarus]

You have to also remember that Howe turned down Celtic because he wasn't allowed the level of control that he needed. He came here partly because it 'felt right' - largely due to Staveley. 

 

Since then Staveley and Ghoudoussi are gone, - reportedly pushed out and heartbroken, and with the official reason being that they need to let Eales do his job.

 

Mitchell has come in apparently without Howe being asked or told until it had happened, Howe then does an interview about how he needs to be allowed the level of control that he needs to do his job

 

The transfer window in terms of incoming players is a complete disaster, Howe tows the line about everyone working together and pushing in the right direction, then Mitchell comes out with a series of closed door interviews (did Howe know these were happening) in which he says he was in a supporting role, that the current model isn't fit for purpose, that Guehi was a Howe choice, that Howe is best at training, that they couldn't stand in anyone's way if they wanted to leave - particularly if it was the FA, and that the plan will work next time because it'll be his. Blame insinuated as being on Howe, Ashworth, Staveley and Ghoudoussi, and as an adage insinuates that we paid too much for some of our players. He aso refers to himself in the 3rd person and is dripping in management speak. 

 

It all sounds like about 20 huge red flags to me.