Steve Bruce

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

Re RDM, I'm sure there was a tweet where XIA said something along the lines was "Most importantly was to have somebody with guts" in response to why RDM went and we chose Bruce etc.

Suggests RDM started to bottle it etc.

[DaveAV1]

32 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

Re RDM, I'm sure there was a tweet where XIA said something along the lines was "Most importantly was to have somebody with guts" in response to why RDM went and we chose Bruce etc.

Suggests RDM started to bottle it etc.

I don't think he had any bottle or interest in the first place. He certainly couldn't be bothered to buy a midfield. 

[bobzy]

3 hours ago, Grasshopper said:

preceeded by 7 losses in 8 followed by a draw v Burton once our "get out of jail card" went off.

Just shout louder, then more people will hear you.

Yes, preceded.  As in, we're improving.

 

Something about a theory without substance?

Edited April 11, 2017 by bobzy

[bobzy]

1 hour ago, DCJonah said:

I'm conflicted with him. His results and our form recently show he deserves the chance next season, but the way we play makes me think he won't get us promoted and we're wasting our time with him. 

 

This is vaguely where I'm at - although I think he could easily get us promoted and, as such, we're not wasting our time with him.

There's just not much to enjoy about watching a really dull football team.

[HanoiVillan]

3 hours ago, Grasshopper said:

That last sentence leads me to believe that sometime next season he will be sacked.

In all honesty, it's highly probable. The average tenure for a Championship manager is now less than 12 months or something ridiculous like that, and clearly if automatic promotion is the aim the pressure will be on from minute dot. 

That still doesn't mean it makes more sense to sack him though. 

[Grasshopper]

16 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

In all honesty, it's highly probable. The average tenure for a Championship manager is now less than 12 months or something ridiculous like that, and clearly if automatic promotion is the aim the pressure will be on from minute dot. 

That still doesn't mean it makes more sense to sack him though. 

The real paradox about it all is.

The more rope (end of season, pre-season more signings) you give him the even more rope you must give him, negated by the possibility of it going tits up sooner or later, The sooner meaning we have enough time to save the season. the later meaning - rinse & repeat (the new manager needs a pre-season/own players ......ad infinitum)

This season the board established 10/11 games as a "D-Day". OK different circumstances, so when is D-Day due next season? 15 games? 20 or 23 games.

When do you make a call?

[vreitti]

1 hour ago, Grasshopper said:

When do you make a call?

Well, not at present, seeing as we're still on an unbeaten run. The best we've seen all season. If we totally fade out and don't improve from this, then perhaps he should go at the end of the season. 

I don't want to see us 'playing it safe' for the remainder of the season, and I refuse to think Bruce would do just that, given what's at stake.

 

[DaveAV1]

1 hour ago, Grasshopper said:

The real paradox about it all is.

The more rope (end of season, pre-season more signings) you give him the even more rope you must give him, negated by the possibility of it going tits up sooner or later, The sooner meaning we have enough time to save the season. the later meaning - rinse & repeat (the new manager needs a pre-season/own players ......ad infinitum)

This season the board established 10/11 games as a "D-Day". OK different circumstances, so when is D-Day due next season? 15 games? 20 or 23 games.

When do you make a call?

I think this is a very strong reason why the board will be reluctant to sack him. They are desperate for stability and are aware also that Steve Bruce is a popular guy. I'm not suggesting it's a popularity contest, but he has lots of friends in the game and support at the moment from a lot of Villa fans, whilst a lot are undecided, me included. Remember the shit we got when Timmy was sacked? And let's face it he was, in my very humble opinion, a disasterous, clueless fraud. The club want to try to break the appoint, struggle, sack, repeat cycle, which is a very sensible aim but not at all costs. That's the tricky bit, where do you draw the line? I'm glad it's not my decision and hope that we don't have to make it and SB gets us up as Champions by this time next year. 

[TRO]

9 hours ago, romavillan said:

Looking at ex-players in other teams would support the idea that the coaching is poor IMO. They can do it elsewhere but since before MON we have been diabolical at giving the player ont he ball options and being static. MON's forte of the quick and dangerous break was rehearsed down to a fine art and it got us 3 6th spots on the trot, but there was never any plan B and no way to relieve pressure, against a good team with their tails up it was bakcs to the wall and then wait for a chance to break.

We have not been a good footballing side for a very long time, Big Ron, Little and Gregory I'd say had us playing the nicest stuff I can remember well. I'm too young to remember Saunders' villa, how they played anyway, I knew the results but I was too young to go down the ground. The nervousness I think is a big part of it, but we don't seem to have a pattern of play with the ball that has become automatic, second nature, so even a player having a bad day just by going through the motions would be automatically giving options, or at least pre-prepared runs to move the opposition about etc. So often over the last 10 years or so with the ball we are completely static, the player on the ball has no-one to pass to and things get dire really fast.

Bruce played in a very good united side, that whilst it wasn't exactly Guardiola, they knew how to manage the game and keep the ball when required, they could create a goal passing out from the back etc. too. So you'd think he knows a thing or two about it, seems stopping us giving away 2 goals every week was the first focus, now let's see what progress can be made in the other two thirds of the pitch. Right now let's face it, even with the great results, we've played shit.

I think the point you say about moving/ running off the ball is significant.....the player on the ball has no options, so subsequently gets caught, to compound the problem, which is another problem, they get robbed through lack of ball control and weak presence......in some ways ,hence the way they play.

This problem has been with us for years.

I think it is a lot to ask the manager and coaches to fix everything in such a short space of time.....slowly,slowly does it.

[Nigel]

1 hour ago, Grasshopper said:

The real paradox about it all is.

The more rope (end of season, pre-season more signings) you give him the even more rope you must give him, negated by the possibility of it going tits up sooner or later, The sooner meaning we have enough time to save the season. the later meaning - rinse & repeat (the new manager needs a pre-season/own players ......ad infinitum)

 

Funny enough I see a different paradox.

Does Bruce abandon these safe defensive tactics that are producing results in order to try a more expansive game yet risk losing his job if results start to drop?

[TRO]

1 hour ago, Grasshopper said:

The real paradox about it all is.

The more rope (end of season, pre-season more signings) you give him the even more rope you must give him, negated by the possibility of it going tits up sooner or later, The sooner meaning we have enough time to save the season. the later meaning - rinse & repeat (the new manager needs a pre-season/own players ......ad infinitum)

This season the board established 10/11 games as a "D-Day". OK different circumstances, so when is D-Day due next season? 15 games? 20 or 23 games.

When do you make a call?

I think you have to accept GH that many folk ( including the club) believe given the necessary time, he will deliver.

you certainly don't, so I think you have a very miserable time ahead of waiting for him to fail and subsequently we sign a new one.......or he delivers what most of us including the club, think he will .......and you change your opinion of him.

i guess we have to wait and see.

[DaveAV1]

14 minutes ago, TRO said:

I think you have to accept GH that many folk ( including the club) believe given the necessary time, he will deliver.

you certainly don't, so I think you have a very miserable time ahead of waiting for him to fail and subsequently we sign a new one.......or he delivers what most of us including the club, think he will .......and you change your opinion of him.

i guess we have to wait and see.

I think that's a bit harsh on GH, I don't think for a moment he's waiting for him to fail, he just thinks he will. I seem to remember a post of his not that long ago when he was showing signs of putting a tentative foot on the platform of The Steve Bruce Express. To be fair I've bought a ticket but I'm concerned that we may not have enough coal to get up the hill. 

[AJ]

I enjoy reading the comments in the Brum rag, which the blosers make about their manager situation. Their tears give me sustenance which helps me get through the day.

So the gist of their misery, and compulsion to write grammatically poor and childish comments to the Brum Mail is that they originally whined about Rowett, because he gave them boring football. Now, they are whining about Zola because he isn't winning, but he at least brought the hope of attractive football.

Do we really want to mirror those clowns?

[vreitti]

It sure seems a strange reality if we actually have to choose between losing by playing quality football, or winning with lackluster hoofball.

 

[DCJonah]

10 minutes ago, AJ said:

I enjoy reading the comments in the Brum rag, which the blosers make about their manager situation. Their tears give me sustenance which helps me get through the day.

So the gist of their misery, and compulsion to write grammatically poor and childish comments to the Brum Mail is that they originally whined about Rowett, because he gave them boring football. Now, they are whining about Zola because he isn't winning, but he at least brought the hope of attractive football.

Do we really want to mirror those clowns?

No. 

But I'm not sure that's the only option. 

[Grasshopper]

1 hour ago, Nigel said:

Funny enough I see a different paradox.

Does Bruce abandon these safe defensive tactics that are producing results in order to try a more expansive game yet risk losing his job if results start to drop?

you are dead right.

in your version of a paradox you can ask the question

Is Bruce capable/willing to set us up for an expansive (I'd prefer to call it a more game-dominating approach - direct or a passing game) style?

On a parallel note - I dont think we need a manager who "styles" the team just to keep his job. We need a manager who will get us promoted

[sparrow1988]

53 minutes ago, DaveAV1 said:

I think that's a bit harsh on GH, I don't think for a moment he's waiting for him to fail, he just thinks he will. I seem to remember a post of his not that long ago when he was showing signs of putting a tentative foot on the platform of The Steve Bruce Express. To be fair I've bought a ticket but I'm concerned that we may not have enough coal to get up the hill. 

Then get out and push

[Grasshopper]

On the subject of

Winning dire football

losing attractive football

I'd like to say this.

This season we will more than likely finish between 7th and 12th playing turgid football so we wont get promoted.

So having a preference of either  

1) finishing 7th (our highest realistic position) playing turgid football and knowing we wont be getting promoted after Ipswich & Barnsley at home (realism) or Burton away (last hope)

or

2) finishing 12th playing a "dominating intent" style knowing the playoffs were also gone like above.

Of 1) or 2) I'd feel more confident with 2) going into next season.

The claim of "turgid football but getting results" simply has no creedence if we dont get promoted. And I think we can safely say that "the horse has bolted" or "that ship has sailed"

And, if I may add.

We wont get promoted this season. The reason is not because of the Turgid football or because we didnt play "pretty" football.

The reason is RESULTS.

It just so happens to be that the football on show was not "pretty". It was in fact "Turgid".

Edited April 11, 2017 by Grasshopper

[Villan_of_oz]

30 minutes ago, Grasshopper said:

On the subject of

Winning dire football

losing attractive football

I'd like to say this.

This season we will more than likely finish between 7th and 12th playing turgid football so we wont get promoted.

So having a preference of either  

1) finishing 7th (our highest realistic position) playing turgid football and knowing we wont be getting promoted after Ipswich & Barnsley at home (realism) or Burton away (last hope)

or

2) finishing 12th playing a "dominating intent" style knowing the playoffs were also gone like above.

Of 1) or 2) I'd feel more confident with 2) going into next season.

The claim of "turgid football but getting results" simply has no creedence if we dont get promoted. And I think we can safely say that "the horse has bolted" or "that ship has sailed"

And, if I may add.

We wont get promoted this season. The reason is not because of the Turgid football or because we didnt play "pretty" football.

The reason is RESULTS.

It just so happens to be that the football on show was not "pretty". It was in fact "Turgid".

2 questions for you GH....

1. Do you think Bruce has any chance of getting the team playing in a way that you would be happy with next season?

2. If we are playing decent football next season and tracking for promotion at some point will you admit that you were wrong? 

I'm not being a dick here, I just think if you want hold very strong views like yourself then you have to be open to being wrong. 

For the record I don't disagree with all your points and now there isn't a 'Bruce out' I find your posts easier to digest. 

Edited April 11, 2017 by Villan_of_oz

[Grasshopper]

8 minutes ago, Villan_of_oz said:

2 questions for you GH....

1. Do you think Bruce has any chance of getting the team playing in a way that you would be happy with next season?  

No

8 minutes ago, Villan_of_oz said:

2. If we are playing decent football next season and tracking for promotion at some point will you admit that you were wrong?  

yes

but I doubt it

8 minutes ago, Villan_of_oz said:

I'm not being a dick here, I just think if you want hold very strong views like yourself then you have to be open to being wrong. 

If being wrong gets us promoted - I'd take it in a heartbeat.

I'm 100% commited to my opinion "I dont think he'll get us promoted"

So it'll take a lot of convincing.

Promotion would convince me

I doubt it though

8 minutes ago, Villan_of_oz said:

For the record I don't disagree with all your points and now there isn't a 'Bruce out' I find your posts easier to digest. 

So just for the record

"Bruce......."