If Eddie was still manager now........................

[s6t9a2f3f]

Bearing in mind our budget and wage structure as a premiership club and we cant go and buy wonderful quality and flair when we like - what style of football do you think we would be playing ?

[huw.Y.WattfromWare]

We’d be playing what Eddie has always played and would still be middle of the Championship, alongside PNE & Rovers.

[RalphCoatesComb]

We’d be playing what Eddie has always played and would still be middle of the Championship, alongside PNE & Rovers.

Or be alongside Horwich Wanderers at the foot of the 4th Division

[s6t9a2f3f]

We’d be playing what Eddie has always played and would still be middle of the Championship, alongside PNE & Rovers.

I agree, if you can imagine the wage bill for Bournemouth last season and obviously they got relegated, so to get better players (and remember 3 of their players - goalkeeper, wilson and Ake sold for around 80 million pre season) and higher wages that is a massive, massive investment.

[cricketfieldclarets]

We’d probably be non league. All the evidence suggests we were going down. And when we did we’d have been even more snookered. So we’d have gone down and down and down and bust.

We would be the Rangers of Lancashire.

[Burnley1989]

We’d probably be non league. All the evidence suggests we were going down. And when we did we’d have been even more snookered. So we’d have gone down and down and down and bust.

We would be the Rangers of Lancashire.

And don’t even mention the state of the youth system

[Jakubs Tash]

....we wouldn’t be in the Premier League.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

I think we'd be in the championship, but I also think that we would've got promoted with him at some point, I just don't know if we would've lasted more than a season.

We know he has an eye for a player and regardless of what's said about him and the youth system, he's not a terrible manager, not even a bad one.
He was the right man at the right time and left in a respectable manner.

[cricketfieldclarets]

and left in a respectable manner.

No no no. We prefer it when managers do a Coyle. Or when they get sacked like coterill. Or when they become hero’s then zeros like Mullen.

[dandeclaret]

I prefer it when managers "Do a Coyle".... i.e. achieve something notable, and then leave for what they perceive to be a better option.... whether they get it right or not. It usually means they have moved the club forward a good deal.

Nice blokes, who do an average job at best, can do one.

[ClaretAL]

I was at the player of the year wards the last season Eddie was in charge, and was told by more than 3 that the players had no interaction with Eddie at all. And for those who were there they will remember Charlie being absolutely bladdered.

[Bordeauxclaret]

I’d always argue we were in a far better position as a club in general when he left compared to when Laws left.
The squad was far better, he’d got rid of a lot of the ageing high earners and replaced them with plenty of younger better players with a sell on value.

As for the style of football, you could you what he wanted to do, he just never got close enough to getting it right consistently. I think he lost heart for whatever reason. As pointed out above I don’t think we’d have gone up with him.
Worked out far better for everyone when he decided to go.

[MT03ALG]

Considering that we have survived in the Premier League because of our strong defensive performances, with Eddie in charge we would be almost certainly in the Championship if not in League 1 or 2.

[cricketfieldclarets]

I prefer it when managers "Do a Coyle".... i.e. achieve something notable, and then leave for what they perceive to be a better option.... whether they get it right or not. It usually means they have moved the club forward a good deal.

Nice blokes, who do an average job at best, can do one.

He took over a team of ageing pros with questionable attitude in a time of transition.

He signed us Ings, Trippier, Austin, Mee, Vokes, Stanislas for a combined fee of about £5m.

That definitely moved the club forward.

Although we never got their true resale value when they left. For various reasons. That’s some transfer record. All of which played their part in where we are today. As did Howe.

[what_no_pies]

Howe was decent enough for us on reflection but I found the football rather boring. I know Dyche has his critics for the way we play but we specialised in passing it to nowhere under Eddie Howe. Along the back 4, a pass up the line and then back to the fullback and repeat. Also didn't see our players busting a gut very often during his time here. I was becoming really disenchanted by the game at that point actually. The Championship is populated by a disturbing number of players putting in half arsed performances and being made millionaires for it. The Premier League is worse still as its no longer a sporting contest but a battle of the richest. Give me a humble group of grafters over fancy footwork and egos any day of the week.

[NewClaret]

Championship or lower

[dandeclaret]

He took over a team of ageing pros with questionable attitude in a time of transition.

He signed us Ings, Trippier, Austin, Mee, Vokes, Stanislas for a combined fee of about £5m.

That definitely moved the club forward.

Although we never got their true resale value when they left. For various reasons. That’s some transfer record. All of which played their part in where we are today. As did Howe.

It’s the same argument as Cotterill vs Coyle. They signed players, but realistically they only became very good players under much better managers. Imagine having that talent and being nowhere near the top 6.... you only have to read articles from Trippier on Dyche to understand the difference. Laws, Howe, nice blokes who did an average job at best.... give me managers with clear achievements any day.

[Shaggy]

Howe wasn’t the man for us. Just not a good fit at all and the football was very ponderous and ineffective.

I think fans perceive Howe in a better light than anything he actually achieved with us mainly because he was taking over from Laws who was the wrong man at the wrong time if that makes sense.

[cricketfieldclarets]

It’s the same argument as Cotterill vs Coyle. They signed players, but realistically they only became very good players under much better managers. Imagine having that talent and being nowhere near the top 6.... you only have to read articles from Trippier on Dyche to understand the difference. Laws, Howe, nice blokes who did an average job at best.... give me managers with clear achievements any day.

All them players were 22 or under when Howe signed them. Obviously they hadn't peaked or even developed properly. That's why they've since played 800 Premier league games between them. Obviously Dyche played a big part in their development.

But their managerial careers are scarily similar. Almost identical.

1 Relegation each. 1 title each. 1 runner up position for us (where Bournemouth currently lie).

Premier League Record

Matches 198
Wins 59
Draws 49
Losses 90
Goals For 195
Goals Against 277
GD -87

Premier League Record

Matches 190
Wins 56
Draws 43
Losses 91
Goals For 241
Goals Against 330
GD - 89

His record suggests that we definitely would have gone up and stayed up.

As it stands it worked out well for all 4 parties.

[ClaretTony]

It’s the same argument as Cotterill vs Coyle. They signed players, but realistically they only became very good players under much better managers. Imagine having that talent and being nowhere near the top 6.... you only have to read articles from Trippier on Dyche to understand the difference. Laws, Howe, nice blokes who did an average job at best.... give me managers with clear achievements any day.

My dad always used to tell me that Harry Potts won the league with Alan Brown's players.
I'll always say that Jimmy Mullen won the 4th Division with Frank Casper's players and Owen Coyle won promotion with Steve Cotterill's players.

Having said that, would Brown, Casper and Cotterill have ever achieved what Potts, Mullen and Coyle did with those players? Probably not I would think.

As for Howe, he did leave some good players for Dyche although I still believe he had very little to do with the signings of Trippier and Mee. But he did bring in players such as Austin, Vokes, Shackell, Ings. But we were going nowhere - the back four of Trippier, Duff, Shackell, Mee looked clueless. Just over 18 months after he left that back four took us to the Premier League.

[dandeclaret]

All them players were 22 or under when Howe signed them. Obviously they hadn't peaked or even developed properly. That's why they've since played 800 Premier league games between them. Obviously Dyche played a big part in their development.

But their managerial careers are scarily similar. Almost identical.

1 Relegation each. 1 title each. 1 runner up position for us (where Bournemouth currently lie).

Premier League Record

Matches 198
Wins 59
Draws 49
Losses 90
Goals For 195
Goals Against 277
GD -87

Premier League Record

Matches 190
Wins 56
Draws 43
Losses 91
Goals For 241
Goals Against 330
GD - 89

His record suggests that we definitely would have gone up and stayed up.

As it stands it worked out well for all 4 parties.

What happens when you overlay spend to that record though? Wages and Transfer fees? That's where the picture looks very different doesn't it?

[ClaretTony]

What happens when you overlay spend to that record though? Wages and Transfer fees? That's where the picture looks very different doesn't it?

Very, very different.

[joey13]

He’d be divorced

[cricketfieldclarets]

What happens when you overlay spend to that record though? Wages and Transfer fees? That's where the picture looks very different doesn't it?

You will always find a way to discredit the work Howe (or Cotterill) did in laying the foundations and relatively speaking doing a good job for us. We could find a way of saying how much Dyches policy risks our future given the vast majority of the squad are over 30 with no future resale value and all coming out of contract. But I wont because he has done a very good job.

Pointless going on. The stats show Howe is at least a good a manager as Dyche and possibly better given where he started. But I also believe that the evidence shows Dyche could probably take a league two side up through the leagues.

Both good managers.

Both very similar records.

Both similar achievements.

It comes down to you not liking Howe personally nothing else.

[cricketfieldclarets]

Very, very different.

As above circa £5m on Ings, Trippier, Mee, Stanislas, Vokes and Austin.

You are suggesting spending money and investing in a squad, whether that's £5m or £500m is a bad thing.

[ClaretTony]

You will always find a way to discredit the work Howe (or Cotterill) did in laying the foundations and relatively speaking doing a good job for us. We could find a way of saying how much Dyches policy risks our future given the vast majority of the squad are over 30 with no future resale value and all coming out of contract. But I wont because he has done a very good job.

Pointless going on. The stats show Howe is at least a good a manager as Dyche and possibly better given where he started. But I also believe that the evidence shows Dyche could probably take a league two side up through the leagues.

Both good managers.

Both very similar records.

Both similar achievements.

It comes down to you not liking Howe personally nothing else.

Dan’s point is nothing to do with him not liking anyone. He’s clearly explained.

[cricketfieldclarets]

Dan’s point is nothing to do with him not liking anyone. He’s clearly explained.

As have I. Howe is clearly as good if not a better manager than Dyche.

Stats and expert opinions prove that.

[ClaretTony]

As have I. Howe is clearly as good if not a better manager than Dyche.

Stats and expert opinions prove that.

I’ll let you believe your own comments then

[dandeclaret]

You will always find a way to discredit the work Howe (or Cotterill) did in laying the foundations and relatively speaking doing a good job for us. We could find a way of saying how much Dyches policy risks our future given the vast majority of the squad are over 30 with no future resale value and all coming out of contract. But I wont because he has done a very good job.

Pointless going on. The stats show Howe is at least a good a manager as Dyche and possibly better given where he started. But I also believe that the evidence shows Dyche could probably take a league two side up through the leagues.

Both good managers.

Both very similar records.

Both similar achievements.

It comes down to you not liking Howe personally nothing else.

I don't dislike Howe. I just thought he didn't do a very good job. Hailed as the brightest young manager in the country upon arrival, he took the team backwards. He took over from Laws, another nice man, but average manager, who took the club backwards too. 8th in Howe's first season, 13th and on a losing run when he left in the 2nd season without being able to defend and goals drying up. There were a number of poor signings, for a club with little money at the time. There was a lad whi ended up at Fleetwood (I think) - didn't we pay somewhere in the region of £0.5m - £1m on? That was more than Dyche got to spend. Dyche took the players and turned them into winners. Something Howe and TIndall weren't able to do. I will admit to disliking some of Howe's staff, but I wouldn't use that to assess his managerial ability. 8th to 13th, a worse achievement than Laws. Dyche had to sell some of Howe's better players and got the team promoted.

I know you don't want to add in transfer fees,but according to Transfer market - Howe signed 34 players at Bournemouth for over £250m pounds... and that doesn't include the massively overwaged free transfer... and the result got them relegated. Dyche has signed the same number of players for half that amount.

I think it's fanciful to say that Howe would have achieved broadly the same. With more money, he achieved less with Burnley and Bournemouth. Visually, we had a team going backwards, and performing below expectation, whereas under Dyche they've performed above expectation for the vast majority of his time here.

[Shaggy]

What’s Howe’s record for us in the championship vs Dyches record over a similar period? That’s the real comparison for us.

[Dyched]

Howe may have spent £150m more but him like Dyche struggle in terms of buying to improve the first 11.
When forced to buy due to a player leaving they do okay. But when buying for the sake of trying to improve they are both terrible in the market.

Both always fell back to their key men, Ward, Mee, S Cook, Francis, Arter, Barnes, Gosling.

Signings like Josh King, Chris Wood worked as others went and they had to play.

Signings like Gibson, Vydra, Ibe, never worked as they simply can’t do what is require like the old timers could.

[Cirrus_Minor]

I don't believe Howe could have repeated anywhere near the success that Dyche achieved. We probably would have been around the mid table of the championship until the first PL promotion money ran out and then struggled to stay in the league. I think Howe new that and jumped ship back to Bournemouth. I think his style of play demanded highly technical and pacey players, that would be out of our price range. His style, for me, was also boring at that level that I thought left us badly exposed in defence that saw us concede at lot.