Once a week for an hour during the Premier League season, The Athletic’s Newcastle United subscribers have the opportunity to ask us for our views and insight into what’s happening at their club.
Here, we have pulled together some of their questions and our answers from the first 2024-25 edition of our Inside Newcastle live Q&A.
Want to ask a question on anything Newcastle-related? Chris Waugh will be back on Monday at 2pm BST (9am ET) for another session…
Why, oh why, did we not strengthen? — Matt D
Chris Waugh: There is no short answer, Matt, and I would point you towards our inside-the-window read.
But it was not down to a lack of will. When Eddie Howe says everyone at the club has been pushing to strengthen, he is being genuine. The problem was the strategy did not work and, allied with restrictions linked to the Premier League’s profitability and sustainability rules (PSR), it left Howe without a reinforced first XI.
There is no doubt the PSR crisis they faced in late June added an element of caution to Newcastle’s negotiations, as it should. Newcastle know they cannot leave themselves in such a vulnerable position again.
However, the pursuit of Marc Guehi, in hindsight, appears flawed. Newcastle could not meet Crystal Palace’s asking price, so they should have tried to pivot sooner.
Newcastle were right not to put themselves in a difficult financial position again by overpaying for Guehi, but they miscalculated that deal and it has left them short. When it comes to the right-winger position, Newcastle have cover there, but their inability to offload fringe players has hamstrung them, too.
It is a complex picture but Newcastle’s failure was not down to a lack of effort, it was a combination of mitigating factors, but largely a flawed strategy.
Guehi has stayed at Palace (Richard Pelham/Getty Images)
Is there friction between Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (PIF), the majority owners, and the club’s management team? — John C
George Caulkin: Everybody is preaching unity, but you would like to think there were frank conversations after Sunday’s win against Tottenham Hotspur.
I don’t think anybody at the club is particularly satisfied about what happened, or didn’t happen, during the transfer window and what’s important now is that the management team provide clarity for supporters, who have certainly done their bit this summer.
That is the club’s plan, which is good. It’s not fair that Howe has to take the brunt of questions on matters of strategy that aren’t really his domain.
Have your opinions changed regarding the ambitions of the PIF-led ownership or do you still think they want to be ‘No 1’? — Ben H
Caulkin: This is a legitimate question, and one that has been asked internally at the club.
In public, everyone says the same thing: nobody should doubt the ownership’s ambition, nothing has changed, etc. Obviously, we can also see the constraints in terms of PSR and there’s not much that can be done about that.
One way PIF can demonstrate its ambition is to press the button on big infrastructure projects. I asked the club about that, and PIF’s attitude, a few weeks ago. In terms of a new training ground, the timeline has slipped.
Is there any truth in the Kieran Trippier to Turkey rumours? — Peter A
Waugh: The reports coming from the Turkish end (the deadline there is September 13) were curious and have taken people on all sides by surprise. There does seem to be at least one strong report linking a Newcastle player with a move to Turkey in every window, and very few of them have materialised!
Trippier has been keen to leave, having been frustrated at losing his starting place to Tino Livramento and wounded by the on-field captaincy being taken off him and given to Bruno Guimaraes, and a potential move to the Saudi Pro League has been floated throughout 2024. That deal has not materialised (yet) and, while it is not impossible that Trippier departs to a country whose window is yet to close in the coming days, Howe is desperate to retain the 33-year-old.
(MI News/NurPhoto via Getty Images)
Any updates on stadium expansion plans/a new training ground? — Stuart H
Caulkin: The best thing I can do here, Stuart, is point back to a piece from a couple of weeks ago which featured extensive quotes from Brad Miller, the club’s new chief operating officer. He’s in charge of big infrastructure projects.
There are no definitive answers here. On the stadium, Miller says a decision “in terms of next steps and what direction we’re going to be taking” is imminent.
To me, this is one area where PIF still needs to prove it means business.
How can PSR be an issue if we can make £65million bids for Guehi? Will the money we didn’t spend get added to future windows? — Clayton H
Waugh: It is a fair question and I think it requires Darren Eales, the chief executive, and/or Paul Mitchell, the sporting director, to come out and explain this.
Newcastle did have money to spend. It was not a case of not having any PSR headroom to invest. After the sales of Elliot Anderson and Yankuba Minteh and a £70million-plus ($92m) loss dropping off the calculation, they had wriggle room post-June 30. Which is why they were able to make such sizeable bids for Guehi.
But such vast expenditure would have affected Newcastle’s capacity to invest in the future. The club do not want to be left in such a fraught position as they were in June again, so every big-money deal is being even more carefully considered, while they have a limit for how much they are prepared to pay for each target. Newcastle offered the maximum they were prepared to for Guehi, given the potential implications for PSR moving forward.
As for whether the money will be added to future window expenditure, the early noises are that it will be, yes. Certainly, they have greater PSR capacity going forward because of that.
Have expectations been lowered, or are Newcastle still saying sixth place and European qualification is the minimum requirement? — Asa M
Caulkin: In July, Eales said: “We expect to really be in Europe. That has to be the aim for us next season.” This was the first time leaders at the club have given specific targets in public.
Our understanding is that the club will address a disappointing transfer window soon, so perhaps we’ll find out if those targets have softened.
Ultimately, it was the responsibility of Eales and Mitchell to strengthen the first team. It would be grossly unfair if Howe has to carry the can for their failure.
Are we sleepwalking into a disaster? So many of the squad are down to a year left on their contracts. It’s another summer where we haven’t sold any of our older players… — William U
Caulkin: You make a good point about the glut of players entering their final year. That list includes Martin Dubravka, Fabian Schar, Callum Wilson, Sean Longstaff, Jamaal Lascelles and Emil Krafth.
What’s interesting is whether that provokes uncertainty. Dressing rooms are delicate and we’ve just had a summer of instability. Newcastle have a good group of professionals, so I’m not concerned in that sense. But does all of this stuff make even one per cent difference to attitudes, performances and so on if players have to think about what might happen to them next? I don’t know.
Newcastle have been dreadful sellers. They’ve kept players for too long and failed to refresh and that means they’ve lost value. It’s not beyond the realms of possibility that some of those players will stay — Longstaff, for example, is still at a decent age (27 next month) and if they eventually sell him it would represent pure profit. Ridding the wage bill of others will help PSR. But it does mean a big summer ahead in 2025.
Longstaff is into the final year of his contract (Gareth Copley/Getty Images)
We found ourselves in a position where we could either overpay for Guehi or sign nobody. How was our shortlist so short? — Andrew B
Waugh: I can understand why it came across that way, but it simply was not the case that it was Guehi or nobody when Newcastle and Howe sat down and assessed potential centre-back targets. Guehi was at the top of the list, but others were seriously considered, like AC Milan’s Malick Thiaw and Bayer Leverkusen’s Edmond Tapsoba.
Players were scouted and identified, but Guehi was eventually chosen as the prime target. Mitchell was said to be confident that he could bring him in for a price Newcastle could afford PSR-wise, but there was a miscalculation as Palace did not lower their demands or agree to a sale.
Should Newcastle have pivoted to alternative targets sooner? Quite possibly. And, in hindsight, it appears definitely. But whether players of a high-enough calibre were attainable by that stage, who everyone inside the club unanimously agreed would improve them and bring the qualities they needed, I am unsure.
The optics of the Guehi saga are negative, but not because there were no alternatives.
Can we expect Mitchell to implement his vision as sporting director? The targets throughout the window seemed predetermined — Ian B
Waugh: That is the theory, and the lack of time he has had in post is certainly a mitigating factor. Mitchell was appointed on July 4, after the rush to satisfy PSR in June, and he joined with a blueprint already in place.
While the plan was tweaked and there was what was described by multiple sources, who will remain anonymous to protect relationships, as a “reset” in early July, Mitchell has not had decent time to assess the squad and what is needed.
Howe still desires input on transfers and Mitchell will need to consider the head coach’s views.
Mitchell is yet to speak to external media but, once he does, he can present his vision for the club.
What is happening with Odysseas Vlachodimos, Isaac Hayden and Garang Kuol? — Ben S
Waugh: There is a chance each will depart on loan, and all are available, but there is a possibility none of them do.
With Vlachodimos and Hayden, their wages are an issue, so Newcastle would likely need to come to an agreement with any club taking them and probably subsidise most of their pay packets.
With Kuol, it is curious he is yet to earn a loan move, but Mitchell’s late arrival cannot have helped, and Newcastle did not secure temporary moves for any of their young players until the final week of the UK window. Kuol is 19 years old and not close to playing for Newcastle’s first team, so he requires a loan to aid his development.
Garang Kuol could be loaned out again (Quinn Rooney/Getty Images)
Are Newcastle likely to go back for Guehi in January? — David D
Waugh: They will conduct a post-window debrief over the coming weeks and assess what their approach will be for January and beyond. But, without predetermining the outcome of that, Guehi has been a long-term target and is likely to remain so. Attempts were made to sign Sven Botman and Anthony Gordon in the windows before they actually arrived at St James’ and Newcastle like to pursue the “right players”.
That was pre-Mitchell, however, and whether the new sporting director concurs with that strategy remains to be seen.
Much may depend on how Guehi performs in the months ahead, what the market is like come January, whether Newcastle can get him for a decent price then and what the club’s needs are. Injuries and loss of form at other positions and successful returns to action for Botman and Lascelles may shift the focus.
Which is a long way of saying, yes, Guehi will almost certainly feature heavily in conversations, and it would not be a surprise if Newcastle renewed their interest either in January or next summer. The issue in both cases may be potential rival suitors, though.
GO DEEPER
How Joelinton’s split role helped an underperforming Newcastle beat Tottenham
(Top photo: George Wood/Getty Images)
