Newcastle United: to survive or thrive?

Newcastle United has turned from second-tier basket case to Premier League overachiever in the space of two years. It is no doubt thanks to owner Mike Ashley, managers past and present (Chris Hughton and Alan Pardew) and perhaps most encouragingly, the skills and snout of chief scout Graham Carr.

Carr, the father of comic Alan Carr, has scoured France and allowed the club to bring in excellent players at cost-effective prices. The two key names secured upon return to the Premier League were Cheick Tiote and Hatem Ben-Arfa; they have since been joined by Sylvan Marveaux of Rennes and, perhaps most beneficially, France International midfielder Yohan Cabaye, late of Lille.

Courtesy: guardian.co.uk

While there are many Francophones now residing Tyneside, there's more than just that to the Newcastle French Connection. Newcastle's transfer dealings so imitated those of Ligue 1 club Lyon that Newcastle blogger Kris Heneage immortalized the link in this post two days ago. In it, he describes Lyon President Jean-Michel Aulas' planning behind a successful football club, business and pitch-wise.

The principles laid out are sound in theory, but would be difficult to implement in practice. But this isn't Ashley's - or Aulas' - problem, but that of their manager. The rules are business-smart and also give supporters consistency in expectation.  However, the points could doom a club into setting their own level, as if achievement is desirable, but merely a by-product.

Indeed, in many ways  - especially satisfying alleged "problem players" - Newcastle seem to have implemented these statutes more effectively than Olympique Lyonnais. The Toon Army sits in third place in the Premier League, but is still yet to play the Manchester twins, City and United, as well as Chelsea. It's probable that Tiote and Cabaye will have more illustrious suitors - Manchester United could maybe use them both - and the monies received for Andy Carroll make that deal look like a magnificent decision from the boardroom.

Does this platform work? As a league superpower - as Lyon are, but Newcastle aren't - unquestionably. It also helps if your city is a beautiful, luxuriant metropolis in the south of France. Can the same be said of the a chilly outpost in England's northeast?

It would stand to reason that every club obeys a subset of these rules. Every player, outside perhaps Lionel Messi, has his price. Cristiano Ronaldo's was 80 million pounds, Fernando Torres' about two-thirds of that. Sir Alex Ferguson could perhaps even get a bunch of rocks and $20 for Michael Carrick. Even when the money offered is silly; it would be idiotic to refuse it.

But basing a club's economy significantly on the sale of their best players - even when already possessing replacements - can make a club more fiscally secure in the short term, at least as long as the overall talent level is maintained.  Should the scouting fail or injuries hit - c.f. Wigan Athletic - the club could face an uphill battle to meet even modest expectation. From a mid-table side, the model also, however, fails to capture the imagination.  This inspiration is so important in sport, but now may become a thing of the past.  In many cases unbridled, fantastical hopes for one's team are now a thing for Football Manager games rather than reality.


Reducing a club's "achievement ceiling" means setting a level where they can expect to be consistent EPL performers barring unforeseen circumstances. This is what adept businesspeople do: control those circumstances under their control.  But if a club constantly loses their best talent, the best result they can expect is for a strong Cup run and top-ten finish.

Would supporters trade a good Cup run and, best-case, a Europa League campaign for the hopes that accompany retaining their best players?  Good question.  Certainly the pointy-heads in accounting would prefer this model; but fans' hopes are given an upper boundary - for better or worse.  Now re-born after a period in the Championship, NUFC supporters might be the best ones to answer this question: would they trade this new team of Cabaye, Marveaux, Tiote and Ben-Arfa for a golden age of Michael Owen, Mark Viduka and Alan Smith?  The full truth probably won't be evident until that time when (if?) these new Toon stars are enticed to pastures new.

Evolving football philosophies

Noted philosopher Marge Simpson once said "we can't afford to shop at a store which has a philosophy". Philosophy is nice, but, like everything, subject to the dreaded Cost/Benefit analysis.

In fact, "footballing philosophy" is used only rarely to describe the methods of managers like Tony Pulis or Sam Allardyce and is reserved for so-called purists like Owen Coyle or Arsene Wenger. Almost by definition, pragmatists - including even Jose Mourinho - are lauded only for results.

Certain fans expect their squad to play a certain way - not necessarily as a result of tactical choice, but because "we've always done it". Because success was once achieved playing a certain way, success must always be attained thus. Such an attitude results not in top-four expectations of success (seen by outsiders as "We deserve it because we're United/Liverpool/Arsenal"), but of fans' yearning for glory days - and players - past (the "He's not as good as Warren Barton" attitude).

The Barton reference is deliberate, not just because he's one of the faces of Fox Soccer, but also because his greatest success was as part of Keegan's Newcastle during the mid-nineties. It was this team, with Alan Shearer as it's centre(forward)piece, that totally and indelibly inspired the flawed logic of the "Cult of no. 9", a spearhead supplied by tricksy wide men.

West Ham, the club of Bobby Moore, loved the idea of West Ham football: thrusting wing play and the ball spraying about like Darren Fletcher on a good day. Though times tough and good, the Hammers could be counted on for moments of magic, even when they featured John Hartson.

At both clubs, a transformation has taken place.

Subject to managerial and personnel changes, both these clubs have reinvented themselves. The Hammers did so through choice after being dumped into the second division. After dispensing with the popular but perhaps overmatched Gianfranco Zola, they employed Avram Grant, a man with as much personality as yoghurt. Grant, the only man to not register a score on a Myers-Briggs test, couldn't inspire the Hammers to play good football and when the second division beckoned, pragmatism reigned.

Their club has evolved, albeit by the choice of Messrs Gold & Sullivan, through a perceived necessity. In true Darwinian fashion, the Hammers of 2010-11 needed to evolve in order to survive - perhaps even as an entity, given a perilous financial state. The catalyst was the appointment of Allardyce, known as the ultimate long-ball merchant.

Evolution can be violent, inflammatory change; a force of nature that we only mostly understand. West Ham's evolution promises to be just that. The response of an organism to its environment occurring in the far reaches of the Northeast takes a different form: that of slowly adapting current equipment in order to thrive.

At Newcastle, it wasn't relegation or a change of manager which inspired their move away from a tried footballing philosophy, but the sale of Shearer's successor and Geordie icon-in-waiting, Andy Carroll. When Kenny Dalglish offered 35 million pounds for the next Tyneside messiah, Mike Ashley and Alan Pardew's poker skills bluffed the Reds up to a very suitable price and then cashed in.

They did so knowing that while Carroll could be the best English centre-forward of the next decade, offers of that calibre don't come along often for unproven commodities. This left them with a line led by the likes of Demba Ba (who's knees have failed more medical tests than Crippen), Leon Best and Shola Ameobi - and pre-empted midfielders Cheick Tiote, Yohan Cabaye and - hopefully - Hatem Ben-Arfa into supplying the goals.

Alan Pardew, courtesy: telegraph.co.uk

This lineup is given so much impetus from the centre of the park - rather than, as Toon history dictates, out wide - and has worked well so far. Though they're not expected to stay there, the Magpies sit in fifth position - after adapting their game style to suit their players, rather than the reverse.

Evolution occurs in order for a species to survive and thrive in a new, changing environment. It can be spontaneous, is always reactive (rather than proactive) and always benefits the evolutionary organism in the short term - just think of the dodo. Questions then, are asked in the long term with the benefit of hindsight.

So it's a lot like football.

The Alan Pardew Project

Alan Pardew is the new boss at Newcastle United. After Mike Ashley decided to fire Chris Hughton it was always likely that the former West Ham manager would be appointed to fill the leadership void on Tyneside. Rumour has it (and it must be said again that this is strictly rumour) that he was seen dining with Ashley in a chichi London eatery the night before Hughton was turfed from his role at St. James' Park. The paucity of current top-class managerial options - even Alan Curbishley turned his nose up at the job - also suggested that Pardew could well be the man for the job.

The most curious part about this appointment is not that Hughton was fired, or even that his replacement comes straight from League One. The most interesting part is the length of contract endowed upon Pardew. The Newcastle hierarchy has seen fit to dish out a five-and-a-half year contract to the 49 year-old silvertail after refusing to commit to The Understated One (Hughton) for even one extra year following a string of good results. The writing on the wall was plain: Hughton was never going to get that contract renewal whether he earned it or not; if only for reasons unbeknownst to us all, he was not the man that Ashley wanted in charge.

The reason five-plus years is curious is that it comes directly after management stated there will be "no rewards for failure" on Tyneside. Alongside that came the standard owner's fare that every penny will be watched under the new gaffer. This implies that Ashley thought Hughton's tenure should be stamped "Fail". If winning the Championship in a canter and maintaining a healthy Premier league position is insufficient then Hughton is guilty. But it also says that whoever took on the job would be judged by the same standards and would have only the same cattle on hand. Perhaps it was shrewd negotiating by Pardew in demanding a five year deal, knowing Ashley could be counted on to lean in whichever way the wind blows. Or perhaps even more believably, Alan Pardew is simply that convincing a salesman that he pitched the Big Man on his features/advantages/benefits so well that Ashley bought the lot. If so, that's a trait not to be underestimated as all the best managers are first-class pitchmen, but Ashley didn't make his millions by being gullible so it is a long bow to draw.

Pardew has said his first thoughts were on maintaining the Magpies' Premiership status - a good start - but if he is to be judged by the same criteria that Hughton has been then he has a pitched battle on his hands. By committing to judge Pardew by the same standards by which he's axed The Understated One then surely Ashley has just offered over five years wages' to a man with a questionable history of achievement and will reward Pardew for whatever he bring to Tyneside: success, mediocrity or failure.

Whichever way you approach, it seems like Alan Pardew, through Mike Ashley's good humour, good eye-for-talent or poor judgement, has been rewarded before the results are in.