Go on then…Rate the summer 2024 Transfer window.

[Keefaz]

THAT WAS A GOOD TRANSFER WINDOW

[sixx]

Very worrying and stinks of unprofessionalism in the backroom. I’d be fuming if I was one of Gordon, Isak or Bruno. The feelgood factor around the club is waning fast.

[mosstef]

2/10

Didn't strengthen the first 11.

 

Also questionable if we have strenghtened in depth. We still look very vulnerable in some positions, in particular GK even thought we have brought in two new GKs.

 

Most deadwood is still here.

[Tsunami]

2 for me as well. We knew well before the end of the season where we needed strengthening. We also knew who we needed to let go.

 

Tosin going Chelsea was clearly a blow but you have to question the contingency planning. We ended up letting 2 players go that we would have preferred to keep, gaining a complete dud of a keeper in the process.

 

We should have walked away from Guehi 3 weeks ago. The PSR shambles smacks of incompetence; it hardly crept up on us.

 

I’m pleased we didn’t cave in on Guehi and it’ll be a pain when he goes to Lpool next season for 35/40M.

 

Hopefully we’ve learnt some lessons and avoided setting ourselves up for PSR issue next year.

[Gallowgate Toon]

Kelly is a genuinely good pick up as long as he's fit - he's a good footballer, potentially very good. I expect Osula will have a quiet next few months but feel he'll also surprise us in the second half of the season onwards.

 

Outside of that, it was bad. 2 positions outlined as key and neither filled, somehow ended up with a bizarre keeping situation. 3/10.

 

Lascelles and Botman aside as we'll likely see neither until 2025, I still believe we have a first team that's extremely competitive. While a few clubs have been busy, I'm not they're much stronger in terms of actual quality. Maintaining good fitness will be key for us, as obvious as it sounds.

 

 

Edited August 31 by Gallowgate Toon

[Hhtoon]

3/10 but that is mainly due to having to read incessant whinging of outraged, fickle fans than any actual transfers themselves.

[George Bailey]

Generous would be 3/10 for potential of Kelly and Osula and not losing one of our current key players.

 

Reality says 2/10. Made to look naive and amateurish by approach across the full transfer window, odd GK situation, 'reports' of disunity/disharmony in the ranks, potential Gordon having 'head turned', deadwood still here, other sides around us having strengthened to one degree or another..

 

Not great, not great at all.

 

Howe will earn his money and enhance his already good reputation if he guides us to top 6 now imo.

 

Howay the lads.

 

 

[TRon]

Next summer's transfer window should be interesting, because the repercussions of this shit show will be felt then. If we finish out of Europe then I would imagine our better players will have got fed up waiting to play CL again and we'll be selling as many as we'll be buying.

[GEFAFWISP]

Factoring in Jenas being binned by the BBC for pesting on colleagues might up my vote to a 7/10.

[Randy]

1.5/10

 

Been made to look utter fools by Steve Parrish. If the average fan here could see it, why not the big money boys? Especially after we tried to nick Freeman.

 

That on top of the look of PSR panic/incompetence, the offing of the Staveleys, the undermining of Gordon, etc. The Project has been severely damaged. As you blokes like to say...worrying.

 

Fortunately, the sun rises tomorrow. Hopefully.

 

[BergenMagpie]

3 hours ago, Keefaz said:

THAT WAS A GOOD TRANSFER WINDOW

We are all thinking the same, but fucktards like you believe its a discussion

[CPL]

Sucks more watching Minteh and Anderson for other teams without spending the money generated.

 

Selling ASM wasn't as painful thanks to Gordon's performances. 

[Turnbull2000]

Are the Mag usually as doom laden?

 

https://www.themag.co.uk/2024/08/that-decision-might-have-just-cost-newcastle-united-a-european-place/

 

 

Edited August 31 by Turnbull2000

[Wolfcastle]

We didn't get worse in isolation, but probably did compared to competitors.

Though I get the long-termism of a Guehi its not an area I'd have been focusing on to the extent they did as far as this season goes but again understand the false economy in these soullessly regulated times of not spending money on positions were well stocked in even if we cant shift some of the stock we'd like to.

So 4. 

[Cronky]

Eddie has made it explicit that he only wants players in who will improve the squad. That sounds obvious but amidst the general pressure to achieve and progress, it's an important issue to keep hold of. 

 

Man U have spent the decade since Fergie left in bringing in players who aren't any better than the ones they already have. They also did that in the 20 or so seasons between Busby and Fergie, with the same results. Likewise Liverpool between Dalglish and Klopp.

 

In the summer before Fergie won the league, he brought in hardly anyone. He had the nerve to give his players the message that they were good enough, despite narrowly missing out on the title to Leeds the season before. Later on, he was prepared to take a step backwards in order to allow his younger players the experience they needed, and the team benefitted greatly in the long-term.

 

Years before, when Clough's Forest were remarkably chasing the title in the season after they had been promoted, he was tempted to bring in a player before the close of the transfer deadline (as it then was). It was tempting to respond to an impulse to 'make sure', but he decided against it because that would be a failure of nerve and would give his existing players the wrong message.

 

It looks like Eddie put his foot down a bit in resisting the desire of others to bring in new faces of less than ideal quality at more affordable prices. I don't think that was just a matter of saving money for the bigger buys. I think he was also wanting to maintain the morale of the existing squad, and give them the message that they would only be replaced by others of significant talent. It's a delicate balance which that very naive Mag article doesn't deal with.

 

On the Mitchell / Howe relationship, there probably have been differences of opinion. If both men are good at their jobs, that's bound to happen. Providing they are able to reach some form of resolution, that's okay.

 

Final thought re Mitchell and Eales and the concept of a DOF. Given the turnover in Head Coaches at any club, it does make sense to make sure that there's some continuity in player recruitment, and that things don't have to start all over again when a new guy comes in.  However, Eddie is very much a man with a long-term approach who likes to grow a strong identity with a club. He tries to create a solid atmosphere of mutual support. He's not one to have his head turned the minute a bigger club comes in. We've seen that commitment with Bournemouth. He may well be an old-style manager like a Fergie or a Busby. That's who we've got and he's done very well so far. His is the route that we're on.

[Keefaz]

20 hours ago, BergenMagpie said:

We are all thinking the same, but fucktards like you believe its a discussion

You are a grumpy boy. Go have a cereal bar and see how you feel after that.

[Holloway]

[NG32]

Poor Window, really poor.

 

Mike Ashley PTSD kicking in.

[Roids]

4/10 , can't fault them too much as psr is a handcuff working as intended (limiting teams ability to compete with the established big wigs)

[SAK]

2/10.

 

We had at least £70m to spend despite the PSR crack but couldn’t find a CB. 

We should have seen Palace wanted a ludicrous fee to sell Guehi and should have moved on two weeks before the window closed. I don’t buy there weren’t other players out there that could have improved us. We just didn’t identify them and make a move.

 

The club has done a lot of good things since the takeover so they get the benefit of the doubt but this can’t happen again.

[Paully]

Not the best rating from the Athletic!

 

Anyway, let The Athletic be your guide with a handy countdown from 20 to one as we rank who had a shocking window and who did rather well out of it…

 

20 – Newcastle

 

Alan Shearer described Newcastle’s summer business as “embarrassing”, while head coach Eddie Howe said he couldn’t argue against the accusation his squad is weaker now than a year ago.

The basic requirement of any summer window is to improve your team or your squad. Newcastle did neither of those things.

They signed Lewis Hall, who was already with them on loan, a young backup striker in William Osula who failed to score in 21 Premier League appearances for Sheffield United last season, plus a couple of reserve goalkeepers.

 

They also sold Elliot Anderson and Yankuba Minteh for PSR reasons, duly strengthening two Premier League rivals in Nottingham Forest and Brighton.

As bad as it gets. Fortunately, they still have a decent first XI.

 

Describe it in one word: Abomination

[Yorkie]

Incredibly over-the-top, as per a lot of the chatter around it. Doesn't even mention Kelly, who's come straight into the first team and objectively improves the squad in that position. 

 

Glad we've got a 'decent' first XI, though. That's fair at least. Only contains literally some of the best players I've ever seen for the club in their respective positions. 

[Upthemags]

On 01/09/2024 at 05:08, Cronky said:

Eddie has made it explicit that he only wants players in who will improve the squad. That sounds obvious but amidst the general pressure to achieve and progress, it's an important issue to keep hold of. 

 

Man U have spent the decade since Fergie left in bringing in players who aren't any better than the ones they already have. They also did that in the 20 or so seasons between Busby and Fergie, with the same results. Likewise Liverpool between Dalglish and Klopp.

 

In the summer before Fergie won the league, he brought in hardly anyone. He had the nerve to give his players the message that they were good enough, despite narrowly missing out on the title to Leeds the season before. Later on, he was prepared to take a step backwards in order to allow his younger players the experience they needed, and the team benefitted greatly in the long-term.

 

Years before, when Clough's Forest were remarkably chasing the title in the season after they had been promoted, he was tempted to bring in a player before the close of the transfer deadline (as it then was). It was tempting to respond to an impulse to 'make sure', but he decided against it because that would be a failure of nerve and would give his existing players the wrong message.

 

It looks like Eddie put his foot down a bit in resisting the desire of others to bring in new faces of less than ideal quality at more affordable prices. I don't think that was just a matter of saving money for the bigger buys. I think he was also wanting to maintain the morale of the existing squad, and give them the message that they would only be replaced by others of significant talent. It's a delicate balance which that very naive Mag article doesn't deal with.

 

On the Mitchell / Howe relationship, there probably have been differences of opinion. If both men are good at their jobs, that's bound to happen. Providing they are able to reach some form of resolution, that's okay.

 

Final thought re Mitchell and Eales and the concept of a DOF. Given the turnover in Head Coaches at any club, it does make sense to make sure that there's some continuity in player recruitment, and that things don't have to start all over again when a new guy comes in.  However, Eddie is very much a man with a long-term approach who likes to grow a strong identity with a club. He tries to create a solid atmosphere of mutual support. He's not one to have his head turned the minute a bigger club comes in. We've seen that commitment with Bournemouth. He may well be an old-style manager like a Fergie or a Busby. That's who we've got and he's done very well so far. His is the route that we're on.

There are some good points in this post, but there's a glaring hole throughout this, and a glaring hole with letting a manager dictate transfer policy:

 

The manager simply does not have enough hours in the day to be well versed in the young talent throughout the world. And, relatedly, the manager's skill is not in identifying talent before it has fully blossomed. That means that regardless of how judicious Eddie is and how long-term his thinking is, he simply isn't the right man to be making transfer decisions that have (literally) decades-long ramifications for the club.

 

I have no doubt Eddie rightly identified Guehi as someone who could step right in, and immediately perform and push us forward. The problem, though, is in a PSR world, we can't field a team of Guehis. Whether we like it or not, our revenues means we have to play ball the way your Brightons play ball, your Aston Villas, your West Hams. We simply cannot afford to bring in 1 Marc Guehi (or zero Marc Guehis) each summer window. We'd never field a complete Champions-League challenging team as players would age out before new ones could be brought in.

 

The point has been (rightly) belabored on here by some that a DoFs job is to have an eye for the long term. That is spot on. My hope is that for future windows, Mitchell comes to Eddie with a list of players to pick from, and we go from there. I really hope that isn't a breaking point for Eddie if it were to come to fruition because we would be losing a top 5 manager in the league.

 

In any case, if we keep up our current form, this is all probably a non-issue. If we finish 5th, I can't see PIF moving to expel Eddie or to rock the boat/change transfer policy in any way. And I think any of us would be happy if that were the case.

[Stal]

4 out of 10 for practicality

2 out of 10 for excitement

 

Hall is now ours, Kelly replaces Dummett, key players retained and PSR made up rules navigated. Point made with regards to us not being able to buy and thus the market felt pretty much stagnated which may lead to change down the road.

Early links were promising as were the first 2 attempts at Guehi, all fell to nothingness leaving a very empty feeling.

[macphisto]

48 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

Incredibly over-the-top, as per a lot of the chatter around it. Doesn't even mention Kelly, who's come straight into the first team and objectively improves the squad in that position. 

 

Glad we've got a 'decent' first XI, though. That's fair at least. Only contains literally some of the best players I've ever seen for the club in their respective positions. 

Does that mean much as we've been mostly terrible during the Ashley years?