Steve Bruce

[TheStagMan]

7 minutes ago, TRO said:

I'm pretty sure it was John Gregory when asked what motivates him said " The fear of losing"

I have heard that line reeled out by sportsman/ businessmen/ all sorts of driven people.....its nothing new.

There is a whole world of difference between being motivated by not wanting to lose and being unable to sleep at night because of it.

 

[TRO]

8 minutes ago, TheStagMan said:

Behave, there is absolutely no comparison between that and the guff that Bruce is coming out with. If that is the best counter argument you have then you should stop trying my friend. 

I have done all my so called counter arguments and I ain't repeating them.

I guess its John Gregory and not Steve Bruce so it doesn't fit the agenda.

all the criticisms have been done to death...what is the point of regurgitating it all time am time again.

....give it a rest.

Edited September 3, 2017 by TRO

[TRO]

3 minutes ago, TheStagMan said:

There is a whole world of difference between being motivated by not wanting to lose and being unable to sleep at night because of it.

 

if your going to hang on to every word that can show SB in a poor light.....its sad.

[briny_ear]

19 hours ago, vreitti said:

Please name a manager in the ELC currently doing a worse job than Steve Bruce? 

Is this a serious enquiry? If so, in a genuine spirit of sharing the facts, I can help you. Here are the managers currently doing a worse job than Steve Bruce:

Simon Grayson - Sunderland

Harry Redknapp - Birmingham City 

Nigel Clough - Burton Albion

Daniel Farke - Norwich

Dean Smith - Brentford

Phil Parkinson - Bolton Wanderers

They are doing worse because their teams have performed worse so far, which is the only valid yardstick by which to judge a manager.

It might be worth continuing this list throughout the season to assess objectively how Satan Steve Bruce is actually  performing out there in the real world.

Edited September 3, 2017 by briny_ear

[srsmithusa]

27 minutes ago, briny_ear said:

Is this a serious enquiry? If so, in a genuine spirit of sharing the facts, I can help you. Here are the managers currently doing a worse job than Steve Bruce:

Simon Grayson - Sunderland

Harry Redknapp - Birmingham City 

Nigel Clough - Burton Albion

Daniel Farke - Norwich

Dean Smith - Brentford

Phil Parkinson - Bolton Wanderers

They are doing worse because their teams have performed worse so far, which is the only valid yardstick by which to judge a manager.

It might be worth continuing this list throughout the season to assess objectively how Satan Steve Bruce is actually  performing out there in the real world.

Or we could just look at the table once in a while.  

[DaveAV1]

It's a good job the question wasn't asking who is doing better, the list would take a lot more typing. 

As for the Brum Mail article, the extracts from the interview with Steve Wyness are from before the start of the season. Since it was Wyness who appointed him and decided to keep him, a ringing endorsement on the eve of the season is hardly surprising. It's more noteworthy that his pals in the press can't find any more recent supportive comments to use. I assume he was getting plenty of sleep in Portugal. 

[Mark Albrighton]

9 hours ago, Bunnski said:

Anyone know what his loss percentage is? 

Since he's been with us, I believe it's 37.5%, 15 defeats in 40 league matches.

While going through those results, it's interesting (or maybe not) to see that before January he was in charge of 13 matches, winning 7 (53.8%) and losing 2 (15.3%).

Since the start of the year, it's been 27 league games and the figures for those are 9 wins (33.3%) and 13 defeats (48.1%).

Whether or not any of that means anything at all, I have no idea. The much fabled new manager bounce? Busy transfer window unsettles the squad? 

Whatever it is, in summary, I like 2016 Bruce, less keen on the sequel.

[Eastie]

9 hours ago, thabucks said:

I dislike Wyness now as much as Bruce. Both need to go as imo the set up is all wrong for our supposed grandiose ambitions. I can't see what we are building. 

Wyness will be loathe to sack Bruce as it means he has failed too - however xia is not a fool ! 

[Eastie]

1 hour ago, DaveAV1 said:

It's a good job the question wasn't asking who is doing better, the list would take a lot more typing. 

As for the Brum Mail article, the extracts from the interview with Steve Wyness are from before the start of the season. Since it was Wyness who appointed him and decided to keep him, a ringing endorsement on the eve of the season is hardly surprising. It's more noteworthy that his pals in the press can't find any more recent supportive comments to use. I assume he was getting plenty of sleep in Portugal. 

Agreed, I posted the can't sleep comments weeks ago on this thread - not sure why the evening mail are regurgitating an old interview from YouTube .  

[TrentVilla]

9 hours ago, TRO said:

• It is perfectly feasible he could win every game.....so we don't' agree on that.
• At the end of September I think it might be best for the unity of the club he does go actually.
• Bruce's record with us has not been great , poor is harsh imo.....Ron Saunders/Graham Taylor only had 45% win ratio's......Martin O'Neill and Brian Little had similar to Bruce.

This poor record is exaggerated.

We have played 5 games....won 1 drawn 2 lost 2.......not what we was expecting, but hardly attracting  the guillotine.

sorry Trent, on reflection I think perspective is apt.

 

You talk about perspective yet in the same post compare win ratio's of managers who managed us in the PL. You talk about 5 games as if the 30 last season didn't occur.

It absolutely isn't feasible that he could win every game. You need to look up the word if you think it is.

If he goes it won't be anything to do with unity of the club it will be due to poor results, poor performances and a lack of progress over both seasons despite signing 13 players.

I think you've actually lost perspective.

[dn1982]

5 hours ago, briny_ear said:

Is this a serious enquiry? If so, in a genuine spirit of sharing the facts, I can help you. Here are the managers currently doing a worse job than Steve Bruce:

Simon Grayson - Sunderland

Harry Redknapp - Birmingham City 

Nigel Clough - Burton Albion

Daniel Farke - Norwich

Dean Smith - Brentford

Phil Parkinson - Bolton Wanderers

They are doing worse because their teams have performed worse so far, which is the only valid yardstick by which to judge a manager.

It might be worth continuing this list throughout the season to assess objectively how Satan Steve Bruce is actually  performing out there in the real world.

That's a load of crap. If Nigel Clough keeps Burton up he's done a good job. His target is 20th. He is 20th. Our target is promotion. We are a long way off so hence Bruce is doing a worse job. Managers are judged on how they do to their target and I'm sure you are aware of that and that seems the yardstick all will be judged on. Bruce is 4pts off his minimum target and 7pts off his actual one. Very similar to RDM but without the 10 months and 2 windows to sort it. No more excuses. Bruce has to deliver. 

[Dr_Pangloss]

1 hour ago, dn1982 said:

That's a load of crap. If Nigel Clough keeps Burton up he's done a good job. His target is 20th. He is 20th. Our target is promotion. We are a long way off so hence Bruce is doing a worse job. Managers are judged on how they do to their target and I'm sure you are aware of that and that seems the yardstick all will be judged on. Bruce is 4pts off his minimum target and 7pts off his actual one. Very similar to RDM but without the 10 months and 2 windows to sort it. No more excuses. Bruce has to deliver. 

Indeed, it was a fairly dumb point. Burton for instance are a tiny club who spent something like £500k on players this season. Doing a great job there is indeed survival. What qualifies as a good job is relative to the club's expectations and resources, of course. 

Edited September 3, 2017 by Dr_Pangloss

[Dave J]

On 31/08/2017 at 06:59, Davkaus said:

This 'get a villa man in' rubbish is how the geordies ended up with shearer in charge. 

Well I totally agree here- I absolutely concur that he has to be the right man- it would just be nice to have the " right man " who shared the same passion for the club - I did offer that I don't know who this might be right now. 

[Eastie]

23 minutes ago, Dave J said:

Well I totally agree here- I absolutely concur that he has to be the right man- it would just be nice to have the " right man " who shared the same passion for the club - I did offer that I don't know who this might be right now. 

Nigel Kennedy

[Demitri_C]

11 hours ago, TheStagMan said:

**** me. Is Wyness Mental?

Seriously. He respects a man who admits he is so shit scared of losing he cannot sleep at night. THAT IS NOT A POSITIVE!!!!!!!!! Find me any other manager anywhere in football that would say that. Anywhere?

 

Thankfully that article does include the dreaded full support of the board so it shouldn't be long now. 

 

 

I don't see anything wrong with that. Why would you want to lose? I get people don't rate Bruce but slating wyness and Bruce fir that makes little sense to me

[Jareth]

2 hours ago, TrentVilla said:

You talk about perspective yet in the same post compare win ratio's of managers who managed us in the PL.

Well I hear this all the time when it comes to win ratios, but it just ain't so simple to say that a win ration achieved in the prem is better than one achieved in the championship. Premiership managers have premiership squads, championship managers have championship squads. If anything the championship is more competitive, the prem has about 4 teams who could win the thing - not so in the championship. And if this sounds like codswallop, please explain why. 

[DCJonah]

2 minutes ago, Jareth said:

Well I hear this all the time when it comes to win ratios, but it just ain't so simple to say that a win ration achieved in the prem is better than one achieved in the championship. Premiership managers have premiership squads, championship managers have championship squads. If anything the championship is more competitive, the prem has about 4 teams who could win the thing - not so in the championship. And if this sounds like codswallop, please explain why. 

But you're ignoring the strength of the squad in comparrison to the rest of the league. 

In the premier league we never had one of the best squads in the league and the financial power to out spend pretty much every other team. In the championship we easily have had one of the best squads and have been able to out spend everyone. 

So yes, its codswallop. 

[Jareth]

Just now, DCJonah said:

But you're ignoring the strength of the squad in comparrison to the rest of the league. 

In the premier league we never had one of the best squads in the league and the financial power to out spend pretty much every other team. In the championship we easily have had one of the best squads and have been able to out spend everyone. 

So yes, its codswallop. 

OK, so only this side of the argument is ignoring facts? Jesus wept.

[TrentVilla]

5 minutes ago, Jareth said:

Well I hear this all the time when it comes to win ratios, but it just ain't so simple to say that a win ration achieved in the prem is better than one achieved in the championship. Premiership managers have premiership squads, championship managers have championship squads. If anything the championship is more competitive, the prem has about 4 teams who could win the thing - not so in the championship. And if this sounds like codswallop, please explain why. 

I don't place any value in comparisons of win ratio's between managers in different era's, with different circumstances and in different leagues. I think they are of no real value at all.

 

[DCJonah]

1 minute ago, Jareth said:

OK, so only this side of the argument is ignoring facts? Jesus wept.

Well your point made no mention of it. To just say its a championship squad in the championship ignores a lot.