striker

To answer your question directly and as far as I can remember I thought he would be a good signing. However that opinion was based on Hogan being played in the same way he was at Brentford. I mean none of us ( not even you) thought Bruce would spend 12m on a striker who was knocking them in for fun only to then ask that player to play in a totally different way than he was used to and expect him to hit the ground running. When Hogan started to struggle Bruce then dropped him to being a bit part player from the bench thereby ruining the player's confidence. And, not even you would suggest looking at Hogan's physicality, he has all the hallarks of being a target man unless you are completely bonkers or up Bruce's arse? The latter of which seems the case whenever someone has the audacity to criticise Bruce.

I would expect to see a better performance from Villa in this game. The onus will be on Derby to come at Villa thereby leaving a bit more space for Villa to hit them on the break which is Bruce's preferred way of playing. However I just can't see Villa stopping a rampant Derby from scoring so will go for a better performance than last Saturday but a narrow defeat.

Still feel Bruce isn't getting anywhere near the true ability of Villa's squad onto the pitch. I would surmise asking any manager who's squad they would want to manage in the Championship at the start of the season they would have chosen Villa. At the moment Bruce has Villa limping towards the lottery of a playoff place which was the bare minimum expectation at the start of this season and that simply isn't good enough for me nor is the crap performance level which is in danger of catching up with the team.

It isn't a question what I or anyone else on this forum thought. We didn't buy him. Bruce did.

Any Spurs fan I've spoken to really don't rate him at all. A villa win today but I can't see it being comfortable.

The point you refuse to accept is that Hogan went from a prolific marksman under Dean Smith to a player now totally devoid of confidence with Steve Bruce. Your debate would be valid if Villa under Bruce played in the same way as Brenford and Hogan was still playing as he is now. Then i'd fully agree with you but Hogan is never going to be the same type of forward as Davis who is benefiting from playing the role he's accustomed to. A further example would be asking Dwight Yorke or Gary Shaw to play like John Carew or Peter Withe. Not going to happen and that shows just how ridiculous your point of debate is in your eagerness to protect Bruce from criticism. It's a poor signing from Bruce, not in hindsight, but with a total lack of foresight in paying 12m for a player that was never going to fit into Bruce's preferred system.

If Bruce plays him with either Grealish, Lansbury or O'Hare in the No 10 role then you just might see Hogan start to play better.

It's nothing to do with hindsight either though is it. You simply don't spend 12m on a player then ask him to play in a totally different way than he's used to and expect him to flourish almost immediately.

Well everyone else didn't adapt to those systems immediately hence the poor run of results and the constant chopping and changing of players. You could also argue that Hourihane is still being less effective than at his previous club due to being played in a more withdrawn role. It wasn't difficult for Davis to adapt either was it when you consider he had been playing the same role for the U21s for quite some time prior to breaking into the first team. Furthermore I don't agree that Hogan should take full responsibility for his poor performances so far. He simply hasn't been played in a system that benefits his style of play nor given a reasonable amount of games by Bruce to adapt. Consequently his confidence is totally shot. Bruce has to take a lot of the blame for spending 12m on a player that clearly wasn't going to fit the manager's preferred system.

I wonder would he be any worse than Onomah though. Worth giving him another chance to find out?

With respect most managers buy players who can fit the system they play. It's being a tad unfair to expect Hogan to play in the same way as either Davis or Kodjia. He simply isn't built to play that way nor has he been given a run of games to at least give him a chance to try and adapt. When you also consider how many systems and players Bruce has used before injuries hit it's no wonder Hogan hasn't settled.

I still feel Kodjia is too much of a Maverick to be integrated into a Bruce team to function properly. I admit that Villa are missing a fit Kodjia even should it be to give Davis a rest but when 100% would he hold the ball up as well as Davis or be as unselfish on the ball? I also think Davis is finding it more difficult now due to the opposition targeting him. Noted against Leeds whenever he got the ball he was surrounded and continully pressed. That will happen until the end of the season as teams have identified just how important he is to the way Villa play. Could also be affected by fatigue but he has been rested through international breaks.

In numbers yes but you'd have to look at the contributions those players were making performance wise before being injured. Aside from Terry the other two aren't being missed at the moment. I did previously state the Kodjia injury may be a blessing in disguise concerning Villa being a better team without him and have seen nothing yet to sway me from that view. It has also made Bruce more concentrated and stopped him tinkering with systems. In January Villa don't need Kodjia coming back or a like for like replacement. What is needed is a loanee of the same ilk as Davis and that now seems to be a widely accepted viewpoint.

Spoke to a Spurs fan about Onomah who didn't rate him at all. Can't pass, can't tackle, isn't an attacking or defensive midfielder and doesn't score many goals. Spurs fan's words, not mine. For the most part we're seeing that apraisal in a Villa shirt so it's time Bruce benches him and plays one of O'Hare, Lansbury or Grealish who imo are better players.

Seen that first half performance many times this season. No threat going forward and sitting back handing the initiative to the opposition. Second half better but really didn't work their suspect keeper nearly enough and again had to rely on a bit of individual brilliance to come away with a point which I would have settled for before the game started. However not impressed with Leeds at all and felt if Bruce had made the substitutions at half time I think Villa could have nabbed the win. If Villa are to achieve that automatic second spot Bruce needs to be a little more adventurous at the right times and drop Onomah for either Grealish, Lansbury or O'Hare.

Just too many 1st half performances like that from Villa under Bruce. Shown absolutely nothing going forward and have failed to work the keeper for the umpteen time this season. You cannot stand off the better teams giving them the initiative to constantly come at you because you are eventually going to punished. Can't understand what Bruce sees in Onomah either. Every time I've seen him this season he's been awful.

A point here would be an excellent result for the Villa as Leeds are plenty good enough to reach the playoffs.

Really the point of this debate is whether Santos or someone like him could come to Villa and get the current squad playing more progressively than Steve Bruce. You think not and you are entitled to that opinion. That opinion, according to your previous posts is based on the assumption that the current crop of Villa players do not possess the same technical ability as those in the Wolves squad and thats where we differ. I find that opinion surprising when you actually see the players Villa have who are more than comfortable on the ball which I quoted in my previous posts and indeed forgot to mention Terry. I am even more surprised when you view the latest video coming out of Man City with Pep coaching Sterling. While i'm not suggesting that Santos is on the same level as Pep coaching wise, most technical managers/coaches can and will improve their player's technical ability on the training pitch if they are looking them to play a certain way if need be. The only player i'd take from Wolves is Neves but i'm not sure how effective he would be in a Steve Bruce team? So considering all of the above I am at the very least open to the view that someone like Santos with the current players available to him could in fact implement a more progressive style at the Villa. Again as previously stated the intention is not to bash Bruce or say that one style is better than the other although in head to heads playing against more progressive teams Bruce has, for the most part, come up short. That concerns me if Villa don't achieve automatic promotion and become reliant on the playoffs to gain promotion.

I feel TRO you are not giving Villa players enough credit by again protecting the current Villa manager. You only have to look at how the likes of Hourihane and Lansbury played for their previous clubs plus even James Bree at FB or indeed Laet. Throw in Onomah, Snodgrass, Adomah, Grealish and O'Hare plus Hogan who previously thrived on through balls and you have players who love the ball at their feet. Of course there's plenty of scope for a Santos to come to Villa and play a more progressive game it just that Bruce chooses not to play that way.

The differences between Villa and Wolves are imo down to the managers. If Santos was at the Villa the squad is plenty good enough to play every bit as well as Wolves do. Conversely if Bruce was managing the current Wolves squad then I feel they would be playing the way Villa are now. Sounds like I'm Bruce bashing but not really. It' just that Bruce and Santos like their teams to play in different ways with one more eye catching than the other but both still pretty effective at the moment. It will be interesting to see if Wolves can keep playing the same way throughout the winter especially if injuries hit? Reading between the lines of Bruce's quotes in the media, our manager doesn't think so although Bournemouth didn't do too badly.

You quoted me before I edited my post. Personally I feel Bruce purchased Hogan with the idea to have Grealish as the supply line. However with the Grealish injury Hogan was asked to play more as a target man which clearly isn’t his game and probably why he has looked so poor. I’d be looking to move on others before Hogan and Thor. Thor can fill in at FB or midfield if Villa suffer more injuries. In January Villa need a striker of the same ilk as Davis and maybe a CB but preferably both on loan as everywhere else is basically covered.

Yeah mate Villa could go down that route though I’m not sure it would be the right thing to do with the amount of games to play after January plus playoffs if that’s the way it turns out? Id rather get someone in on loan as a back up to Davis with Hogan still available should Bruce want to change it as Grealish is available again. Could well be that was the reason for the Hogan purchase in the first place with Bruce looking to play Grealish in behind Hogan threading those through balls to him? Not even Bruce would be stupid enough to think that Hogan was a target man.

No team in the Championship is going to loan one of their top strikers. Villa would have to buy and since there’s very little money to spend well it ain’t going to happen.

It’s there I think due to when joining I was a visiting Everton fan but I’ve always liked the Villa too. I’m now a fully fledged Villa fan in mind and body but still look out for Everton results as my second team.

Not missing Kodjia or Terry at the moment despite the forecasts on here. Said it previously. Bruce with less player options is a much better manager so we’ll done to Bruce and the team.