Paul Mitchell to leave club by mutual consent at end of June (Official)

[Yorkie]

I'm unsure on how to feel about some of those quotes; however, we should resist drawing conclusions from any club communication which is accessible exclusively through the lens of the rags, and without knowing the tone or the questions. Would've been better as an NUFCTV interview. 

[McDog]

1 hour ago, Kid Icarus said:

Not a fan of the way he's speaking tbh.

• He has that management speak about him that I'm hardwired to distrust.
• The 'won't pay over the odds' thing makes no sense when he'd already bid way over the odds for Guehi by the time we walked away.
• Rightly or wrongly I'm not sure how professional it is to dig out your predecessor, and
• I have no idea what he's thinking of suggesting we potentially overpaid on our existing players!

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think if your predecessor is a garden gnome that's allowed currently.

[aussiemag]

I do think he could have worded it in a less harsh way. Just had to say: 

 

- We need to improve our transfer strategy and scouting networks, while there is less risk shopping in England or the PL the prices quoted can not work for us in our PSR situation. 

- Eddie is a fantatic manager and we are working together to improve the transfer strategy and quality of the squad. 

- Yes, we would like to have done better in the window. It was difficult with alot of change in a short period of time. We now have time to reset, review and improve. 

 

Done. 

[r0cafella]

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. 

[Jagten]

2 hours ago, Nobody said:

Isak, Bruno, Botman were all incredible value at the time as well though. No one thought we overpaid for Tonali, if anything he was a massive coup. Gordon I might agree with that the perceived value was over the top, but that perceived value was clearly a load of tosh.

I know I might be very biased when it comes to Isak, but remember I've watched him since he was 16, I knew he would be an incredible signing for Howe. 

Maybe we’re consuming different content but all I saw was smart people that didn’t like it. Our business over the last 12 months has currently been quite bad. 

[timeEd32]

1 hour ago, Jagten said:

Maybe we’re consuming different content but all I saw was smart people that didn’t like it. Our business over the last 12 months has currently been quite bad. 

 

Part of the problem is the Italian media were reporting a fee that was likely higher than what we actually paid (and also some absurd wage claims). But even still I feel like the average opinion was "he's good, but not that good." 

 

Hall could definitely count as high and honestly I'm really wondering why we felt compelled to do that given what our PSR situation would have looked like at the time.

[r0cafella]

36 minutes ago, timeEd32 said:

 

Part of the problem is the Italian media were reporting a fee that was likely higher than what we actually paid (and also some absurd wage claims). But even still I feel like the average opinion was "he's good, but not that good." 

 

Hall could definitely count as high and honestly I'm really wondering why we felt compelled to do that given what our PSR situation would have looked like at the time.

That’s why we did the loan with the obligation in the new financial year. 
 

it’s also worth remembering that when we did this agreement everyone was over the moon particularly after how well he played against us. 

[timeEd32]

1 minute ago, r0cafella said:

That’s why we did the loan with the obligation in the new financial year. 
 

it’s also worth remembering that when we did this agreement everyone was over the moon particularly after how well he played against us. 

 

It's still a lot for an 18 year old and there was reportedly a £4m+ loan fee so we basically used it as a hack to sign him on a six year deal. Clearly we felt it was too good of an opportunity to pass up at the time, but it doesn't make a lot of sense to me after how June ended.

 

 

[r0cafella]

28 minutes ago, timeEd32 said:

 

It's still a lot for an 18 year old and there was reportedly a £4m+ loan fee so we basically used it as a hack to sign him on a six year deal. Clearly we felt it was too good of an opportunity to pass up at the time, but it doesn't make a lot of sense to me after how June ended.

 

 

It was definitely hefty, but nobody took issue with it at that time. I’m with your sentiment though but I still think ultimately if we want to bridge the gap aggressively which I believe was the goal at that time we really had to push the line which is precisely what we did. 

[Sibierski]

Does feel the quotes seem to edge if someone is to pay price for this summer, it’s Eales. Mentioning how things are poorly set up, past dealings etc. were all under Eales watch. High praise for Howe etc. Like Mitchell knows he’s better aligning with a respected coach who’s doing well then Eales.

 

Get where Mitchell is coming from for paying top whack on players. Isak and Tino have been immense and key players moving forward, but that’s £100m. If we are to move forward in current situation, whilst it would be great to add one or two top players, the squad is reaching a point where we need to get 5-6 signings for that £100m, and rely on the scouting network to identify and the top coach in Howe to improve them. Whilst revenues grow sustainably. 

 

 

Edited September 5, 2024 by Sibierski

[ExiledGeordie]

At first glance reading the athletic article I don’t see a lot wrong with what he’s said. Ultimately the proof will be in the pudding but he has the contacts and experience to work with the current PSR framework and I do feel the clubs transfer and selling policy will have to evolve like most clubs. 

[r0cafella]

Much more balanced take on his discussion on the athletic btw. 

[Menace]

Wonder what's happened to Nickson?

[Paully]

Just now, r0cafella said:

Much more balanced take on his discussion on the athletic btw. 

 

Just read it and it is!

 

Someone work their magic with this so it's free to read and I can send on to mates please!

 

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5744787/2024/09/05/paul-mitchell-interview-newcastle/

 

[BennyBlanco]

It might just be me but I definitely get a sense of a disconnect between Howe and Mitchell. Especially when it came to player acquisitions.

 

Ive also heard that he wants his own man in. The good money was on Pochettino but that probably shows the value of local gossip😂

[r0cafella]

The interesting thing is, one of them is lying

 

 

[Menace]

3 minutes ago, Paully said:

 

Just read it and it is!

 

Someone work their magic with this so it's free to read and I can send on to mates please!

 

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5744787/2024/09/05/paul-mitchell-interview-newcastle/

 

 

https://archive.ph/DKs8K

[BennyBlanco]

1 minute ago, r0cafella said:

The interesting thing is, one of them is lying

 

 

 

“Lying” is slightly harsh. But I think it’s fair to say there’s a disconnect there with slight briefs against the other side. Worrying.

[timeEd32]

The Athletic article is so much better. This is a very useful exercise in seeing how the exact same interview is spun in different ways. Hope comes out looking the worst.

[Coffee_Johnny]

11 hours ago, Ronson333 said:

“We want Eddie Howe as our head coach for as long as we can. But we also recognise we are on a journey, and we also recognise his quality and his potential as well. Once again, I’ve never been a guy scared of interest in any of our staff members, especially our head coach, and especially from a level of organization that the FA is.”

I don’t imagine this would land well, at least it wouldn’t with me. Inference is: we are on a journey… and Howe may not be able to stay with us all the way (because he’s not up to it) or he may get tempted away because of his quality. 

[jonny1403]

7 hours ago, Hughesy said:

 

I think you’re confusing the concept of whether a player has proved to be good value after the purchase with the idea that, at the time of purchase, the price we paid seemed too high and we might have got a better deal / paid too much because other clubs saw an opportunity.

 

I certainly recall thinking at the time that £13m for a 30 year old defender who was pretty average seemed quite a lot of money to pay. If you didn’t, that’s great.

13m in this day and age for an established premier league cb was pretty much market standard back then to be honest.

[The College Dropout]

5 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. 

Agreed. 
 

I agree that we’ve paid premiums on a lot of our transfers. Some have worked out tremendously like Isak, some are questionable like Tonali or Hall but at the time all where premium fees at best and overpayment at worst as was reported at the time.  
 

 

But you can’t use that argument then bid £70m for Guehi. That would’ve been the worst one to date. 

[Coffee_Johnny]

9 hours ago, Kid Icarus said:

I don't particularly trust him [Mitchell] or Eales at the moment. 

Me neither. We know where the leadership talent lies, as do they (I sincerely hope). 

[Lotus]

5 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Agreed. 
 

I agree that we’ve paid premiums on a lot of our transfers. Some have worked out tremendously like Isak, some are questionable like Tonali or Hall but at the time all where premium fees at best and overpayment at worst as was reported at the time.  
 

 

But you can’t use that argument then bid £70m for Guehi. That would’ve been the worst one to date. 

I agree. Because of the obvious hypocrisy, if we did in fact bid that much for Guehi, has made me examine that premise. All we have is media sensationalism wrt how much the bid was, I think (correct me if I’m wrong).

If we then realign that idea with the stated policy and reduce the Guehi fee by £15-20M it starts to make more sense.

For me, when it doesn’t add up and we have a couple of suppositions there, we need to redefine/reimagine one of those until the logic holds.

If you get my drift.

[SUPERTOON]

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.