Steve Bruce

[Stevo985]

3 hours ago, sheepyvillian said:

  

If Sherwood had been given the finances that Bruce has had, and given carte blanche on transfers? Absolutely, I'll go as far to say, we would of achieved automatic promotion ,with ,may I add, good attacking football ,but eh , that's jmo .

 

3 hours ago, Stevo985 said:

Stop the planet. I'm getting off.

Just to put some context around my shock here.

 

When Bruce took over, we were on 10 points after 11 games.

Currently, Newcastle in the second automatic spot are on 85 points after 43 games.

For @sheepyvillian's claim that Sherwood would have gotten us automatic promotion to be true (or rather for us to be in an automatic promotion spot NOW), he'd have had to gained 75 points from the subsequent 32 games.

That's 2.34 Points per game.

As a comparison, Brighton, who are smashing the league, have a PPG of only 2.12.
Also as a comparison, the 2.34 PPG required, extrapolated over the 43 games we've played, means we'd currently have 101 points after 43 games, well on track to break Reading's record points haul of 106 pts.

 

So, needless to say, unless Sherwood became a brilliant manager over night, the claim that he would have gained automatic promotion if appointed instead of Bruce is, at best, incredibly generous to Tactics Tim. At worst it's utterly ludicrous.

Edited April 18, 2017 by Stevo985

[NurembergVillan]

9 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

 

Just to put some context around my shock here.

 

When Bruce took over, we were on 10 points after 11 games.

Currently, Newcastle in the second automatic spot are on 85 points after 43 games.

For @sheepyvillian's claim that Sherwood would have gotten us automatic promotion to be true (or rather for us to be in an automatic promotion spot NOW), he'd have had to gained 75 points from the subsequent 32 games.

That's 2.34 Points per game.

As a comparison, Brighton, who are smashing the league, have a PPG of only 2.12.
Also as a comparison, the 2.34 PPG required, extrapolated over the 43 games we've played, means we'd currently have 101 points after 43 games, well on track to break Reading's record points haul of 106 pts.

 

So, needless to say, unless Sherwood became a brilliant manager over night, the claim that he would have gained automatic promotion if appointed instead of Bruce is, at best, incredibly generous to Tactics Tim. At worst it's utterly ludicrous.

[TRO]

Sheepy........ewe have that wrong.

[MarkLillis]

1 hour ago, dn1982 said:

You're confusing stability with decline I think. We've been unstable since Lambert left if that's what you want to call it. Our 1st choice midfield is on paper one of the best in the league. Hourihane was smashing it at Barnsley. Lansbury consistently one of the best in this league and Jedinak well is Jedinak. Upfront we have 2 of the best strikers in the league. Out wide Adomah is up there as one of the best assists in the league. How is swapping from a back 4/5 stability? Or bringing players in and out at a whim? There are no signs we are improving as a team. Results improved after January basically because of Kodija. The football itself though isn't getting better and I'd say it's actually got worse. The best I've seen us play was against Preston at home for 60 odd minutes we played 442 that seems ages ago now. 

I do agree. None of it sounds good.

Recently, although performances were not pretty the team looked solid and like I said stable.Johnstone was showing good form..... Baker and Chester with Jedinak were looking strong, Taylor and Hutton were fine at full back.

Lansbury and Hourihane were starting to show flashes of previous form and Kodjia was knocking them in..

Now three games after the winning run has come to an end this improvement will go away never to return?

Virtually every team in this league goes through spells of good bad form the improvement cannot be linear. But rather it will be gradual and sporadic regardless of how much money we spend.

How many people tell us that money is no guarantee for success, then when success doesn't arrive say it should have done because such and such a club has spent X amount?

I have faith (I hope it is not in vain) UTV!

[sheepyvillian]

17 minutes ago, TRO said:

Sheepy........ewe have that wrong.

A pun as humour, it's a golden rule . Eagerness without thought ,never mind .

[Mjvilla]

40 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

 

Just to put some context around my shock here.

 

When Bruce took over, we were on 10 points after 11 games.

Currently, Newcastle in the second automatic spot are on 85 points after 43 games.

For @sheepyvillian's claim that Sherwood would have gotten us automatic promotion to be true (or rather for us to be in an automatic promotion spot NOW), he'd have had to gained 75 points from the subsequent 32 games.

That's 2.34 Points per game.

As a comparison, Brighton, who are smashing the league, have a PPG of only 2.12.
Also as a comparison, the 2.34 PPG required, extrapolated over the 43 games we've played, means we'd currently have 101 points after 43 games, well on track to break Reading's record points haul of 106 pts.

 

So, needless to say, unless Sherwood became a brilliant manager over night, the claim that he would have gained automatic promotion if appointed instead of Bruce is, at best, incredibly generous to Tactics Tim. At worst it's utterly ludicrous.

It's a different Tim sherwood that @sheepyvillianis talking about though isn't it? 

[sheepyvillian]

1 hour ago, Stevo985 said:

 

Just to put some context around my shock here.

 

When Bruce took over, we were on 10 points after 11 games.

Currently, Newcastle in the second automatic spot are on 85 points after 43 games.

For @sheepyvillian's claim that Sherwood would have gotten us automatic promotion to be true (or rather for us to be in an automatic promotion spot NOW), he'd have had to gained 75 points from the subsequent 32 games.

That's 2.34 Points per game.

As a comparison, Brighton, who are smashing the league, have a PPG of only 2.12.
Also as a comparison, the 2.34 PPG required, extrapolated over the 43 games we've played, means we'd currently have 101 points after 43 games, well on track to break Reading's record points haul of 106 pts.

 

So, needless to say, unless Sherwood became a brilliant manager over night, the claim that he would have gained automatic promotion if appointed instead of Bruce is, at best, incredibly generous to Tactics Tim. At worst it's utterly ludicrous.

You and superfluous, like bosom buddies .

[sheepyvillian]

28 minutes ago, Mjvilla said:

It's a different Tim sherwood that @sheepyvillianis talking about though isn't it? 

You just remember ," the only good football , is winning football "  , unless your Reading, that is .

[dn1982]

31 minutes ago, MarkLillis said:

I do agree. None of it sounds good.

Recently, although performances were not pretty the team looked solid and like I said stable.Johnstone was showing good form..... Baker and Chester with Jedinak were looking strong, Taylor and Hutton were fine at full back.

Lansbury and Hourihane were starting to show flashes of previous form and Kodjia was knocking them in..

Now three games after the winning run has come to an end this improvement will go away never to return?

Virtually every team in this league goes through spells of good bad form the improvement cannot be linear. But rather it will be gradual and sporadic regardless of how much money we spend.

How many people tell us that money is no guarantee for success, then when success doesn't arrive say it should have done because such and such a club has spent X amount?

I have faith (I hope it is not in vain) UTV!

For me this isn't about the last 3 games. Our results changed but our performances haven't. As I said v Preston we played some really good stuff before that I'd be looking at Brighton away for the last good performance. We drew both games. Individually the players do ok but as a team there is very little cohesion that comes down to coaching. I think we have a strong first 11 but we are far from having a strong team. How many teams have better squads on paper? How many teams play better football? Bruce will get us up next year but I can't see the football getting better. 

[Stevo985]

15 minutes ago, sheepyvillian said:

You and superfluous, like bosom buddies .

It's not remotely surprising that you consider facts to be superfluous.

I do agree that it's unnecessary to put so much effort into showing your posts are nonsense, though. Most people realise it already.

Edited April 18, 2017 by Stevo985

[sheepyvillian]

Facts .? Your using stats to bolster your conjecture, because that's what it is  , you can can't be certain that Sherwood wouldn't of done a better job . Your stats have no sway on my opinion ,whatsoever, hence superfluous. 

[TRO]

50 minutes ago, sheepyvillian said:

A pun as humour, it's a golden rule . Eagerness without thought ,never mind .

Ooops

[striker]

Bruce cost Villa the game yesterday with his team selection and tactics. How many times does he have to play three centre backs before realising that it just doesn't work for the current crop of players?

He got two major warning shots across his brow before Fulham eventually scored so why didn't he become proactive and change it?

Why did he leave Villa's best midfielders on the bench when there are so few games left in the season? Did he write the game off against Fulham to concentrate on sha?

I posted prior to the game stating that I'd hoped to see an improvement in team play. What I saw was yet another disjointed performance with the initiative handed immediately to Fulham and they should have buried Villa in the first half.

Fulham kept forming cute little triangles to give the player in possession a constant out yet not once did I see Villa players doing that. That surely must come down to the manager and his coaching staff. In fact I would go so far to say that comes under the title Basic Coaching so what the hell are Bruce and his coaches doing on the training pitch? Even if Villa had Tom Cairny in midfield he would look as shit as Lansbury and Hourihane have under Bruce's tactics.

In short I don't think it's the players. It's the way they are being asked to play and Bruce is strangling the life out of them.

Another performance like that and Bruce will have lost me.

[Stevo985]

7 minutes ago, sheepyvillian said:

Facts .? Your using stats to bolster your conjecture, because that's what it is  , you can can't be certain that Sherwood wouldn't of done a better job . Your stats have no sway on my opinion ,whatsoever, hence superfluous. 

You realise this post basically translates as "I don't like it when people back up their opinion with facts. I won't change my mind no matter how much evidence I'm presented with"?!

Anyway, to give you a response, I've never claimed I'm certain of whether Sherwood would have done a better job.

What I've done is provide some evidence to support my OPINION that Sherwood wouldn't have gained automatic promotion if he'd taken over instead of Bruce (which is what you claimed). In my opinion, to claim that he would have done so is ludicrous. I've provided some evidence to support my opinion.

It's honestly hilarious and massively ironic that you're taking issue with someone "using stats to bolster [their] conjecture"  

If you can provide some stats to bolster your conjecture that Tim Sherwood would have gained Automatic promotion if he'd been appointed instead of Bruce I would, genuinely, be thrilled to see it. We might then be able to have a proper debate rather than you putting your fingers in your ears and blindly dismissing anyone who dares to disagree with you.

Edited April 18, 2017 by Stevo985

[TRO]

6 minutes ago, striker said:

Bruce cost Villa the game yesterday with his team selection and tactics. How many times does he have to play three centre backs before realising that it just doesn't work for the current crop of players?

He got two major warning shots across his brow before Fulham eventually scored so why didn't he become proactive and change it?

Why did he leave Villa's best midfielders on the bench when there are so few games left in the season? Did he write the game off against Fulham to concentrate on sha?

I posted prior to the game stating that I'd hoped to see an improvement in team play. What I saw was yet another disjointed performance with the initiative handed immediately to Fulham and they should have buried Villa in the first half.

Fulham kept forming cute little triangles to give the player in possession a constant out yet not once did I see Villa players doing that. That surely must come down to the manager and his coaching staff. In fact I would go so far to say that comes under the title Basic Coaching so what the hell are Bruce and his coaches doing on the training pitch? Even if Villa had Tom Cairny in midfield he would look as shit as Lansbury and Hourihane have under Bruce's tactics.

In short I don't think it's the players. It's the way they are being asked to play and Bruce is strangling the life out of them.

Another performance like that and Bruce will have lost me.

Get your Sat Nav poised.

[villakram]

Tim Sherwood is a man. Donald Trump is a man. Donald Trump wins, therefore Tim Sherwood would have gotten us promoted. #statistics 

[Stevo985]

Just now, villakram said:

Tim Sherwood is a man. Donald Trump is a man. Donald Trump wins, therefore Tim Sherwood would have gotten us promoted. #statistics 

Ironically more evidence than sheepy has put forward.

[briny_ear]

7 hours ago, Bazmonkey said:

It's not absurd.  Just an opinion.  But I am using 30 years of watching previous Villa teams and 15 years of coaching to come up with this opinion.

I would love to see them go up but IMO based on what I've seen the team is not good enough.

I will gladly hold my hands up if proved wrong.

Well, it was actually a prediction, hard and fast, no ifs or buts.

But an opinion can be absurd. You can't fend off the accusation of absurdity by saying it's just an opinion. 

Steve Bruce has 19 years experience as a coach, so he's no doubt learnt a thing or two just like you have during your shorter time as a coach. Given what he's achieved during that time, it would be bold to say definitively here and now he can't get us promoted.

I've had 55 years watching Villa to your 30 years so I have seen some horror stories that a newer fan like you can hardly imagine. And I'm not giving up on promotion in 2018 as of 18 April 2017. So take heart from that.

[sheepyvillian]

1 minute ago, Stevo985 said:

I've never claimed I'm certain of whether Sherwood would have done a better job.

What I've done is provide some evidence to support my OPINION that Sherwood wouldn't have gained automatic promotion if he'd taken over instead of Bruce (which is what you claimed). In my opinion, to claim that he would have done so is ludicrous. I've provided some evidence to support my opinion.

It's honestly hilarious and massively ironic that you're taking issue with someone "using stats to bolster your conjecture"  

If you can provide some stats to bolster your conjecture that Tim Sherwood would have gained Automatic promotion if he'd been appointed instead of Bruce I would, genuinely, be thrilled to see it.

Whose taking issue? And where's the irony ? I don't need stats ,it's my belief, and your superfluous stats isn't going to change that .

[Rodders]

Brexit makes more sense now