Steve Bruce

[terrytini]

4 hours ago, briny_ear said:

See, this is the funniest thing about all this anti-Bruce campaigning. The most extreme critic of the way Steve Bruce's Villa have been playing is...

STEVE BRUCE!!!!

Tne Grasshoppers, terrytinis, etc. etc., look like wishy  washy moderates compared with our own manager.

No, the football certainly hasn't been great this season but under Bruce we have been defending well and even winning more matches than we lose, which is such a change from the football we have seen from Villa over the past few seasons (and the start of 2016-7), that I am prepared to give him a go at a summer window and a campaign next season to see where he can take us.

If there was an obvious and easy solution to the problem of finding a manager and squad who can turn the club's fortunes around, I'm sure the club would already have taken it. 

In the absence of anyone finding Harry Potter's magic wand, let's stick with a guy who has brought us more success but who has no illusions about the need to improve.

Hey !! I'm no Grasshopper ! He wants him out !

But you are dead right - so why do people see it as negative - we are far more in touch with the Managers own views than those who think its all fine !

FWIW my complaint is not that he doesn't see it, just that it is his own approach that exacerbates it.

I have no issue with anyone who doesn't think that , but it really isn't a particularly extreme or crazy idea, nor is it particularly negative - if at all - at least it gives him credit for being in control of whats happening.

And I fully endorse the rest of your comments..so again, hardly an angry villager with a burning torch.

Maybe for some (not you necessarily ) ANY criticism of him is too much ?

Edited April 24, 2017 by terrytini

[vreitti]

4 minutes ago, TRO said:

I do get folk are not happy with it.

rightly or wrongly it seems I am more inclined than most to give him more time.

If he was happy with the football, I don't think he would come out and condemn it and if he could get us to win, secure points and play convincingly, I think he would.....don't forget we have watched turgid football from previous managers who called it "really excellent"......at least bloke is honest.

but I am giving him the benefit of the doubt and believe in time he will.

if folk disagree......que sera sera.....its their call.

If he's actually unhappy with way we are playing, why isn't he doing anything about it? If he's trying to do something about it, it sure as shit isn't showing, and raises serious questions about his ability as manager. Wouldn't you agree?

Edited April 24, 2017 by vreitti

[terrytini]

2 hours ago, Eastie said:

He did say recently thIngs wIll be faIrly quite In the summer with nowhere near the turnaround iN players as in recent windows but yesterday he commented that he will be very busy in the summer so seems to be covering all bases .

He did indeed and its hard to argue with the need - for all he wants stability its clear we need five or six Ins and Outs, he cant be criticised for recognising that IMO.

[TRO]

9 minutes ago, vreitti said:

If he's actually unhappy with way we are playing, why isn't doing anything about it? If he's trying to do something about it, it sure as shit isn't showing, and raises serious questions about his ability as manager. Wouldn't you agree?

I think where the uncertainty comes in, or difference of opinion,is  some folk think the players  are all ok so it must be Steve Bruce.

I am not convinced all the players are ok.......at the moment.

It may well be he feels he needs more time with them......it may well be that he needs other players to get more out of them and improve the balance.....It may well be that he feels he has bought wrong and that he can't get from them what he thought.....Or as some are alluding to that players are ok and He us no good.

Every poster will make his/ her own choice.

whatever the problem in the shite football......I think he is the right manager and I think he will get it right.....but agree, it's not right at the moment.

Edited April 24, 2017 by TRO

[terrytini]

25 minutes ago, bobzy said:

It's fair to assume that everyone would love Steve Bruce if he had us playing attractive, winning football.

 

At this stage, I think it's equally right to be unhappy that, despite signing creative midfield players in January, he opts to blame a brand of football that bypasses the middle of the park.  Why didn't he just sign 2 more Jedinak-esque players if he wanted to do that?

And therein lies the hope that his current style is purely a choice - since he signed the guys he did we have to assume it is his intention to be less cautious and negative next year.

[TRO]

20 minutes ago, sne said:

Progressive in what way?

Like Wagner.....I assume.

[TRO]

38 minutes ago, terrytini said:

Hey !! I'm no Grasshopper ! He wants him out !

But you are dead right - so why do people see it as negative - we are far more in touch with the Managers own views than those who think its all fine !

FWIW my complaint is not that he doesn't see it, just that it is his own approach that exacerbates it.

I have no issue with anyone who doesn't think that , but it really isn't a particularly extreme or crazy idea, nor is it particularly negative - if at all - at least it gives him credit for being in control of whats happening.

And I fully endorse the rest of your comments..so again, hardly an angry villager with a burning torch.

Maybe for some (not you necessarily ) ANY criticism of him is too much ?

Terry, I do get your argument, I really do and yes I accept that you have not asked for him to be removed.

you think he is being too cautious.....nothing wrong with that, it's your take. I just happen to think under the circumstances he can't get his main objective of hard to beat any other way......frustrating but that's just my take.....as you have already alluded to, it may well change.

However, in the meantime.....why don't you just write to him and ask him why he is playing so cautious and negative.....He may give you a feasible answer that is far more accurate than folk like me who is just prepared to wait until he gets it right.

Edited April 24, 2017 by TRO

[blandy]

41 minutes ago, HeyAnty said:

The squads to big, he's talking about getting rid of players.  'Clear-out' signifies that

and We're still not remotely near the finished article signifies that the current team isn't anywhere near what he wants.

[Godders]

5 minutes ago, blandy said:

and We're still not remotely near the finished article signifies that the current team isn't anywhere near what he wants.

Not necessarily...

"We're not remotely near the finished article. I've got a busy summer ahead" could be read as he will be busy working with this team to get them into the finished article. The mention of the summer clearout could be incidental in the main to the work he's doing with the team.

Not saying that is the case, just pointing out it's another way of reading into his comments.

[TRO]

37 minutes ago, terrytini said:

Hey !! I'm no Grasshopper ! He wants him out !

But you are dead right - so why do people see it as negative - we are far more in touch with the Managers own views than those who think its all fine !

FWIW my complaint is not that he doesn't see it, just that it is his own approach that exacerbates it.

I have no issue with anyone who doesn't think that , but it really isn't a particularly extreme or crazy idea, nor is it particularly negative - if at all - at least it gives him credit for being in control of whats happening.

And I fully endorse the rest of your comments..so again, hardly an angry villager with a burning torch.

Maybe for some (not you necessarily ) ANY criticism of him is too much ?

Who has said its all fine?

[TRO]

1 hour ago, terrytini said:

And therein lies the hope that his current style is purely a choice - since he signed the guys he did we have to assume it is his intention to be less cautious and negative next year.

That " choice" in his view may be by necessity.....its to be established or unearthed.

That "choice" is very conditional IMO

 

Edited April 24, 2017 by TRO

[Demitri_C]

17 minutes ago, blandy said:

and We're still not remotely near the finished article signifies that the current team isn't anywhere near what he wants.

I take that as meaning not reached our full potential yet and we will add 2-4 players in summer with a huge amount of players leaving (gil, sanchez, veretout etc)

 

 

[sne]

29 minutes ago, hippo said:

I don't know. personally I think its a load of tosh. 

The circle we seem to go in is lets get a progressive or continental manager - we get one he's crap - they everyone say 'ah he wasn't progressive' 

I guess that little tosser at Huddersfield would the current 'progressive' flag bearer

OK, I'll not press you on this one as I'm not sure what progressive actually is either . It's one of those terms that means everything and nothing.

I tend not to use it myself, although I'm sure I have.

one thing thou I'm certain it doesn't mean non British.

For example, the most progressive  manager we currently have working in the Swedish league is British. 

Graham Potter is doing an absolute marvelous job at Östersund having rebuilt the club from scratch taking them from the 4th tier to finishing 8th in the top league Allsvenskan in 6 seasons and winning the cup this season. All the while playing a type of movement & passing oriented football using players bought for scraps on signed on a free. Supposedly players from Sweden could not play this type of football, or so we've been told.

 

Massive sweeping generalization coming up.

 I personally do not like the "old school" British 4-4-2 type managers who leads from a distance and lets their coaches do the training, likes proper men, thinks it's OK for the lads to have a few pints after a defeat.

But that's just me, nothing to say it can't work under the right circumstances.

For it to work thou I think it is important that these managers have the right coaches and backroom team under them who has worked along with the manager a lot and who can purvey (is that the right word?) the managers ideas to the players.

This is one area where we have failed for a number of managers now. When signing a manager we should make sure we get his entire team as well.

Another recurring theme with our managerial signings is that they seem rather vague in their tactical approach of how they wan't us to play, Bruce included.

Then again this might just be a communication issues between the managers, coaches and players?

Too many steps distorts the message from "press high and retain possession" into " drop deep and hoof"?

[TRO]

3 hours ago, Grasshopper said:

quite right you are.

However I'm only, "assuming" what people are counter-ing me with, with the "Bruce knows what he's doing" being underlined as fact, as he has 4 promotions.......blah f*** blah.

The football's shite and we wont get promoted playing like this nor is SB capable of implementing any such style with the players at his disposal.

but hey.

its only my opinion, and as you so state, I'm wrong.

 

GH you may not be wrong.....but personally  I just have a different opinion.

The football is turgid

I think he will fix it.

I just happen to think, he will sign a few more players to try and fix it....I think he will.

If he could fix it with the current crop he would, but a pre season may help too.

at the moment he can't fix it with the current crop at the stage we are at.....he may bring in players that will help the balance.

The midfield at present does not look balanced to me despite signing Hourihane and Lansbury......and that is effecting the other departments.

[TRO]

11 minutes ago, sne said:

OK, I'll not press you on this one as I'm not sure what progressive actually is either . It's one of those terms that means everything and nothing.

I tend not to use it myself, although I'm sure I have.

one thing thou I'm certain it doesn't mean non British.

For example, the most progressive  manager we currently have working in the Swedish league is British. 

Graham Potter is doing an absolute marvelous job at Östersund having rebuilt the club from scratch taking them from the 4th tier to finishing 8th in the top league Allsvenskan in 6 seasons and winning the cup this season. All the while playing a type of movement & passing oriented football using players bought for scraps on signed on a free. Supposedly players from Sweden could not play this type of football, or so we've been told.

 

Massive sweeping generalization coming up.

 I personally do not like the "old school" British 4-4-2 type managers who leads from a distance and lets their coaches do the training, likes proper men, thinks it's OK for the lads to have a few pints after a defeat.

But that's just me, nothing to say it can't work under the right circumstances.

For it to work thou I think it is important that these managers have the right coaches and backroom team under them who has worked along with the manager a lot and who can purvey (is that the right word?) the managers ideas to the players.

This is one area where we have failed for a number of managers now. When signing a manager we should make sure we get his entire team as well.

Another recurring theme with our managerial signings is that they seem rather vague in their tactical approach of how they wan't us to play, Bruce included.

Then again this might just be a communication issues between the managers, coaches and players?

Too many steps distorts the message from "press high and retain possession" into " drop deep and hoof"?

The most significant bit for me is ........6 seasons.

The problem as I see it, We fans have no idea of the magnitude of some of these challenges and expect to have everything fixed in a few months.

The poison we have had to change, will take some time.

.....but we will do it.

[briny_ear]

37 minutes ago, vreitti said:

If he's actually unhappy with way we are playing, why isn't he doing anything about it? If he's trying to do something about it, it sure as shit isn't showing, and raises serious questions about his ability as manager. Wouldn't you agree?

I expect he goes home after every match, kicks the dog, and complains to his wife, "Bloody hell, another crap performance. If only there was some way you could appoint someone to be in charge of the selection, tactics and performance of that team, things would change for the better but, sadly..."

There are some pretty extreme views about Steve Bruce playing out in this thread at the moment. And, without wishing to pick on you personally, this sort of comment seems to sum up more general problems of perception about our manager.

When he arrived to take over an unbalanced and pretty ineffectual squad, the first comments he made were "They're not fit enough" and "They have no resilience". Wise comments because arguably those are the two key qualities you need to get through a Championship campaign. Well, he's certainly made us more resilient. I'm also assuming, although I know less of the detail, that he has worked on fitness. Just look at the impact he's had on Flabby as an icon for that! So to say he's not "doing anything about it" seems totally unreasonable. We are quite hard to beat now when we go ahead and we are hard to beat at Villa Park. How long since we've been able to say that about the side?

He is clearly not happy with the quality of play and the way the new squad - don't forget he had to integrate loads of new players bought in January - is gelling. So, on the basis that he has tackled the first two big things he saw wrong with the squad, what earthly evidence do you have that he is not setting about tackling these further issues?

It's this sort of comment that is making me a bit cross at the moment: slightly unfair criticism making massive and unjustified assumptions about the extent to which Bruce is working to improve the squad..

[briny_ear]

18 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

I take that as meaning not reached our full potential yet and we will add 2-4 players in summer with a huge amount of players leaving (gil, sanchez, veretout etc)

 

 

That's how I read it as well.

[PaulC]

22 minutes ago, TRO said:

GH you may not be wrong.....but personally  I just have a different opinion.

The football is turgid

I think he will fix it.

I just happen to think, he will sign a few more players to try and fix it....I think he will.

If he could fix it with the current crop he would, but a pre season may help too.

at the moment he can't fix it with the current crop at the stage we are at.....he may bring in players that will help the balance.

The midfield at present does not look balanced to me despite signing Hourihane and Lansbury......and that is effecting the other departments.

We will have serious problems with FFP. Cant see many signings unless we get rid of a number of players on our books. 

[TRO]

49 minutes ago, blandy said:

and We're still not remotely near the finished article signifies that the current team isn't anywhere near what he wants.

pete, that is exactly my take on it.

and not to be a clever clogs, that is the precise explanation Graham Taylor explained to me in building a team......it can't be done( unless you get lucky) with your initial signings it has to evolve on a rolling basis of marginal improvement.

but of course all that depends on the building managers base point to start with........we was possibly a div 1 side, when we went down from the Prem.

[srsmithusa]

I'm happy that he is not happy about how we are playing.  That's a good sign.

I'm not convinced that he's doing the right things to fix it.  

The slowness with which these "shoots of recovery" are growing cause me to be uncertain that he is doing the right things, or maybe not doing the right things effectively enough.  He lost me in February.  He bought more time from me in March.  Now I'm waiting to see what he does to FIX the (long list of) things that aren't right.