Signings: The Howe Era

[Shearergol]

20 minutes ago, Menace said:

Mostly good. Jacob Ramsey was an overpay, Elanga/Wissa were/are flops.

 

We'll get our money back on Woltemade should we sell..

 

Targett has been poor but I wasn't annoyed when he signed as he had a good loan so can't begrudge it really.

 

Rafa said a long time ago even having a 50% hit rate in transfer market is deemed a success in the modern game so he's above that even with the summer signings. We really do need to risk signings from abroad more often though - most overpays were EPL signings funnily enough.

 

Not a chance

[r0cafella]

9 minutes ago, Shearergol said:

 

Not a chance

Biggest obstacle to that is the very small pool of clubs who can actually pay us what's needed to not make a loss  

[HawK]

Thread is a bit disingenuous - I think there are certain periods he had a lot less or more control than others, e.g. when Ashworth was here.

[Moose]

Judging on success & value for money (I've factored in the Newcastle tax)

 

A (Worth every penny): Bruno, Trippier, Isak, Hall

B (Success): Tonali, Burn, Tino, Botman

C (Mostly good): Gordon, Barnes, Thiaw, Ramsey, Osula,

D (Underwhelming): Woltemade, Wood, Kelly, Targett,

E (Shite): Elanga

N/A: Minteh, Karius, Vlach, Ruddy, all the youth players who immediately get farmed out on loan

Wissa: Wissa

 

 

Edited April 27 by Moose

[Nucasol]

1 hour ago, Moose said:

Judging on success & value for money (I've factored in the Newcastle tax)

 

A (Worth every penny): Bruno, Trippier, Isak, Hall

B (Success): Tonali, Burn, Tino, Botman

C (Mostly good): Gordon, Barnes, Thiaw, Ramsey, Osula,

D (Underwhelming): Woltemade, Wood, Kelly, Targett,

E (Shite): Elanga

N/A: Minteh, Karius, Vlach, Ruddy, all the youth players who immediately get farmed out on loan

Wissa: Wissa

 

 

 

Would have BDB in top tier instead of Hall who is in B. Move Gordon up to B, Ramsey down to D based on overall contribution.

[Joe1984]

16 hours ago, Leemond said:

Lewis Hall is on twice.

Well he is twice as good as some of them...

[The College Dropout]

Weird framing to me.  Managers don’t have total control over recruitment anymore. 
 

Theres been 4-6 eras while he’s been here which is a core problem. 
 

First window Staveley era

Ashworth Era

No Ashworth/Mitchell Era

No DOF era

Now

 

 

And you can’t look at signings without looking at departures.  

[The College Dropout]

1 hour ago, Moose said:

Judging on success & value for money (I've factored in the Newcastle tax)

 

A (Worth every penny): Bruno, Trippier, Isak, Hall

B (Success): Tonali, Burn, Tino, Botman

C (Mostly good): Gordon, Barnes, Thiaw, Ramsey, Osula,

D (Underwhelming): Woltemade, Wood, Kelly, Targett,

E (Shite): Elanga

N/A: Minteh, Karius, Vlach, Ruddy, all the youth players who immediately get farmed out on loan

Wissa: Wissa

 

 

 

This is such interesting and weird framing to me.  Interesting how other fans see the game and team.  

[LFEE]

4 hours ago, HawK said:

Thread is a bit disingenuous - I think there are certain periods he had a lot less or more control than others, e.g. when Ashworth was here.

Ashworth had zero impact on our targets. Not sure how many times this has to be said.

[Kid Icarus]

Just now, LFEE said:

Ashworth had zero impact on our targets. Not sure how many times this has to be said.

While true, he definitely had an impact on our ability to land those targets. Eg there's no way the stand in recruitment team we had last summer would have got Tonali over the line in the way Ashworth did.

[Moose]

32 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

This is such interesting and weird framing to me.  Interesting how other fans see the game and team.  

 

To clarify, I wasn't attributing any credit/blame to Howe, the DoF or anyone else for that matter. I read the question as how well the players have done for us from a footballing perspective and if they represented value for money.

 

[Kilcline]

1 minute ago, Moose said:

 

To clarify, I wasn't attributing any credit/blame to Howe, the DoF or anyone else for that matter. I read the question as how well the players have done for us from a footballing perspective and if they represented value for money.

 

Same, I've taken this thread as looking at who we've signed in the last 4.5 years in general and just spitballing really. Not as a "let's judge Howe's record in the transfer market" discussion, as none of us know for sure who has had what influence etc so 

 

I don't believe @Heron has set it up as a leading question either, but some seem to have interpreted it as being a referendum on whether Howe should be in charge of transfers anyway 

[The College Dropout]

5 minutes ago, LFEE said:

Ashworth had zero impact on our targets. Not sure how many times this has to be said.

Not true in all honesty. A DOF won't identify players but they set the parameters of signings - particularly profile and wages.

 

You think we sign 19-yo Lewis Hall for £40m (inflation) with 12 league appearances in summer 2025? No we probably sign a much more experienced player. 

 

I've said this before - we used to go for high-ceiling low-experience players and players big teams considered but weren't convinced about. Usually meaning getting players 1-2 years early. So we target a different profile of player.

[The College Dropout]

7 minutes ago, Moose said:

 

To clarify, I wasn't attributing any credit/blame to Howe, the DoF or anyone else for that matter. I read the question as how well the players have done for us from a footballing perspective and if they represented value for money.

 

Even still interesting to me how you've defined each segment and the players.

 

Dan Burn £12m. Almost 200 appearances, key member of teams finishing 4th, 7th, 5th. Leader. Key man in the cup runs and scored in the League Cup final and was a colossus that game. He's behind Lewis Hall and the same level as Botman. Burn has contributed a lot more than both those players.

 

Moreover I just view transfers differently. I think (1) have they justified the fee, (2) what was the minimum expectation (3) what was the upper expectation, (4) overall contribution.

 

By those measures Gordon and Barnes have been successes. Both closer to the upper expectation than the lower. Good value for money. Same bracket as Tino and Hall. In no world can they be compared to Jacob Ramsey - has Ramsey been value for money? Has he hit the minimum expectation? Overall contribution? Not for me, nowhere close.

 

But that's just how I see the game.

[La Parka]

https://share.google/R1R3K7p9IcirwGtbB

[LFEE]

31 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Not true in all honesty. A DOF won't identify players but they set the parameters of signings - particularly profile and wages.

 

You think we sign 19-yo Lewis Hall for £40m (inflation) with 12 league appearances in summer 2025? No we probably sign a much more experienced player. 

 

I've said this before - we used to go for high-ceiling low-experience players and players big teams considered but weren't convinced about. Usually meaning getting players 1-2 years early. So we target a different profile of player.

He wasn’t even the DOF he was just a Sporting Director. Either way you confirm my key point he has never identified players.

 

Yeah I would same as we did with Tino.

 

We did but then the hope was we could get more proven players being a more proven team. Not having Tonali able to play for 12 months and Isak forcing a move 12 months earlier than planned and PSR rules and APT rules coming in and being tightened change plans. You can’t just have one approach.

 

 

Edited April 27 by LFEE

[The College Dropout]

1 hour ago, LFEE said:

He wasn’t even the DOF he was just a Sporting Director. Either way you confirm my key point he has never identified players.

 

Yeah I would same as we did with Tino.

 

We did but then the hope was we could get more proven players being a more proven team. Not having Tonali able to play for 12 months and Isak forcing a move 12 months earlier than planned and PSR rules and APT rules coming in and being tightened change plans. You can’t just have one approach.

 

 

 

Same difference.

 

As soon as he left, we stopped signing inexperienced youngsters for first team places like Tino and Hall.

 

From what we know of a Howe-led approach - he wouldn't sign the 2023 Hall's or Tino's in 2025. Those were Ashworth led transfers, they don't happen without him.

 

More proven mostly just means more experienced (in the PL). That's why we spent £150m on proven players for a CL push like Elanga, Ramsey and Wissa. 3 Players that could never be cornerstone players of UCL teams.

[LFEE]

2 hours ago, The College Dropout said:

Same difference.

 

As soon as he left, we stopped signing inexperienced youngsters for first team places like Tino and Hall.

 

From what we know of a Howe-led approach - he wouldn't sign the 2023 Hall's or Tino's in 2025. Those were Ashworth led transfers, they don't happen without him.

 

More proven mostly just means more experienced (in the PL). That's why we spent £150m on proven players for a CL push like Elanga, Ramsey and Wissa. 3 Players that could never be cornerstone players of UCL teams.

We bought Elanga because we thought he’d work well with Isak. We bought Wissa because we panicked so you are foolish attaching any logic to it. Ramsey has looked one of our best players this season and perfectly fine for a UCL team.

 

You talk some tosh at times to fit your own narratives 

[Heron]

5 hours ago, The College Dropout said:

Weird framing to me.  Managers don’t have total control over recruitment anymore. 
 

Theres been 4-6 eras while he’s been here which is a core problem. 
 

First window Staveley era

Ashworth Era

No Ashworth/Mitchell Era

No DOF era

Now

 

 

And you can’t look at signings without looking at departures.  

I mean...happy to do a departures one too...

 

In the first instance I was looking to remove these "Eras' as you have named them - simply because I was trying to remove the debate around who signed them, who didn't sign them, what the set up was and whether Howe could work with it.

 

It was intended to be remove those additional layers and ask whether signings were or were not a success whether that be financially or in terms of capability I.e. adding something to the overall quality of the squad.

 

Upon establishing that, I then wanted to drill into who were the failures (thus far) and why folk think those failures were signed.

 

Appreciate folk won't have read the full thread necessarily - so just to repeat - I feel folk use contradictory arguments to "validate" their removal of Howe. I'm trying to clear up one or two of those "validations" through the use of this thread.

 

Perhaps that seems disingenuous to some, but it's well intentioned. Effectively I'm trying to gain "data" to add weight wither to or against this particular evidence of Howe's alleged poor performance.

[Heron]

5 hours ago, Kilcline said:

Same, I've taken this thread as looking at who we've signed in the last 4.5 years in general and just spitballing really. Not as a "let's judge Howe's record in the transfer market" discussion, as none of us know for sure who has had what influence etc so 

 

I don't believe @Heron has set it up as a leading question either, but some seem to have interpreted it as being a referendum on whether Howe should be in charge of transfers anyway 

Yeah - that's not the immediate aim of the thread. The primary point was whether or not we've spent money wisely irrespective of who was in charge. If we haven't spent wisely then the next question would be who is deemed a failure and then it was thirdly to get to who signed them and why.

 

As mentioned above, perhaps that is leading, but I am just trying to add data or weight to/against one of 3 different theories (I.e. Cannot work with a DoF, Howe has shit transfers, the only good signings were made by DoFs)

[Moose]

6 hours ago, The College Dropout said:

Even still interesting to me how you've defined each segment and the players.

 

Dan Burn £12m. Almost 200 appearances, key member of teams finishing 4th, 7th, 5th. Leader. Key man in the cup runs and scored in the League Cup final and was a colossus that game. He's behind Lewis Hall and the same level as Botman. Burn has contributed a lot more than both those players.

 

Moreover I just view transfers differently. I think (1) have they justified the fee, (2) what was the minimum expectation (3) what was the upper expectation, (4) overall contribution.

 

By those measures Gordon and Barnes have been successes. Both closer to the upper expectation than the lower. Good value for money. Same bracket as Tino and Hall. In no world can they be compared to Jacob Ramsey - has Ramsey been value for money? Has he hit the minimum expectation? Overall contribution? Not for me, nowhere close.

 

But that's just how I see the game.

 

Fair enough, I'll concede on Burn, my bad.

 

I was bored as fuck at work and this thread looked like a little bit of harmless fun to keep me occupied for 5 minutes, I didn't devote much brain power to it 🙃 

 

[Displayname]

Went through the list and had 8 performning above expectations (included Kelly and Minteh purely from the profit made), 8 perfoming as expected and 7 below expectations (didnt have an opinion on the rest).

 

This season sure changed a lot. Not just because of the players we bought in the summer, but also how the previous purchases has performed.

[The College Dropout]

2 hours ago, LFEE said:

We bought Elanga because we thought he’d work well with Isak. We bought Wissa because we panicked so you are foolish attaching any logic to it. Ramsey has looked one of our best players this season and perfectly fine for a UCL team.

 

You talk some tosh at times to fit your own narratives 

Elanga is never a top 6 player.  The club handled the Isak situation horrendously. 
 

Ramsey is a nothing player. Barely impacts a game.  He has talent but he’s a long way to justify his £40m price tag. 
 

You don’t know ball. 

[LFEE]

7 hours ago, Kid Icarus said:

While true, he definitely had an impact on our ability to land those targets. Eg there's no way the stand in recruitment team we had last summer would have got Tonali over the line in the way Ashworth did.

You mean without doing due diligence? 

[LFEE]

11 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Elanga is never a top 6 player.  The club handled the Isak situation horrendously. 
 

Ramsey is a nothing player. Barely impacts a game.  He has talent but he’s a long way to justify his £40m price tag. 
 

You don’t know ball. 

I’ve probably forgotten more than what you currently know 

 

How many games a season do you attend out of interest?