Steve Bruce

[AntrimBlack]

18 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Fat Sam has met his objective wherever he has gone. Wouldn’t be the worst appointment in the world. 

I would take Allardyce over Bruce in a heartbeat.

[DCJonah]

16 minutes ago, briny_ear said:

That’s a different point of course. You claimed they had no game plan. Now it just seems you didn’t like the game plan.

No i didn't, you are confusing me with the person you originally responded to. 

[AntrimBlack]

1 hour ago, Davkaus said:

I think him still being in a job by this point suggests he's going nowhere. Xia's left the country. I'm sure Bruce has spoken with him and Wyness by now. If he was going to be sacked, it'd have happened. 

Now there is a guy with a lot to answer for. Needs to be gone with the manager so that a younger, progressive culture can be instilled in the club.

[Ingram85]

Just now, AntrimBlack said:

Now there is a guy with a lot to answer for. Needs to be gone with the manager so that a younger, progressive culture can be instilled in the club.

Don’t fall in to the trap that progressive mindsets only come with younger people. 

[AntrimBlack]

I do not understand how anyone can think that Bruce will suddenly bring in the younger players and change his whole footballing philosophy to an offensive game.

[thabucks]

12 hours ago, smg said:

i suspect from your comments on this board that you are involved in some way in the world of football possibly financially ? I am interested to know your suggestions as to how we should go forward. Who should be our next manager ? Who should we sign ?

You are right I used to work for OUFC whom spoke with lampard last season but timing for him wasn't right. They only sacked clotet who was doing a reasonable job due to the impending takeover. Kluivert held talks along with Bellamy. Not bad I'd say for a league one club averaging gates of 7k. Now they didn't point them but shows a certain level of ambition and the fact they agreed to talks shows they weren't being overly so. 

I would give lampard a go, he is highly articulate and intelligent and has played under a number of great managers and coaches. I'm not expert though and my previous suggestions like Stam or Clement prove this. I will admit it too that I'm a footballing snob and that clouds my judgement on Bruce  for sure. I don't expect us to play like Citeh but I also won't accept Bruce's style of play, lack of in game management and tactical set up. As I said before we have wasted our chance to rebuild big time and our financial advantage has now disappeared with an ageing squad that needs rebuilding once again. 

[AntrimBlack]

3 minutes ago, Ingram85 said:

Don’t fall in to the trap that progressive mindsets only come with younger people. 

Of course. It usually is the case , though, and the last couple of seasons would seem to indicate that Wyness and Bruce would fall into that category.

[hippo]

3 minutes ago, AntrimBlack said:

I do not understand how anyone can think that Bruce will suddenly bring in the younger players and change his whole footballing philosophy to an offensive game.

It looks likely he will have no choice but to play some of the younger players. Green, RHM, will I am sure get a chance next season.

[sne]

So to summarize we had a vastly improved season compared to the previous one, and going into the next season we are in a vastly worse position than we were this time last season.

To me that says that Bruce albeit very narrowly failed in the short term goal of getting us promoted, while at the same time failed in a big way in the long term goal of building a squad that can challenge in the coming seasons.

As it stands now half or more of the starting 11 will be out of contract or forced to be sold to manage finances. Of those remaining many are pushing 30 or older.

Of the younger ones only Davies was given any substantial game time and after Christmas almost none got any. 

Leaving this rebuild in the hands of Bruce would be folly.

[Wainy316]

We beat all the top 3 at home but as soon as we play anyone half decent away from home we set up to fail.  Far too defensive and that thought process for the first half on Saturday will harm us for years to come.

[thabucks]

11 minutes ago, Ingram85 said:

Don’t fall in to the trap that progressive mindsets only come with younger people. 

Marcelo Bisela is proof he is considered the grandfather of the modern gave by Pep amongst others. 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/sport/amp/football/40879274

Quote

"My admiration for Marcelo Bielsa is huge," Guardiola says. 

The Manchester City manager travelled to Argentina in 2006 to seek out his advice about becoming a coach and the two have been close ever since. 

"He makes the players much, much better and he helped me a lot with his advice."

 

Edited May 29, 2018 by thabucks

[Vive_La_Villa]

1 hour ago, sne said:

Just went back and read the posts from last summer (around p 600 and forward)

Think we might as well copy paste them into the thread and take the summer off.

Nothing has changed and nothing will change with Bruce here.

The scary thing is the squad will be even weaker. 

[TRO]

38 minutes ago, Rob182 said:

TRO, you’re a good poster on here, but I think your support of Bruce sometimes clouds your judgement. How many times this season has Bruce come out and said that he wasn’t happy with how we played in either the whole game or one of the halves? It’s happened a LOT. It can’t always be that the players aren’t following his instructions. It seems quite obvious to me that we set up to defend and try to break on the counter. In a final, against a team that, man-for-man, we should be able to match, that was poor from Bruce. We’ve seen it all season, he only seems to want to play fully on the front foot when we NEED to. Reactive, not proactive.

Rob, I accept your view and yes they are just my opinions.

You could be right....He has to go and it could even be better, but as one poster accused me of if's but's and maybe's thats also the case of a new guy ifs, buts and maybe's.

For my sins...I watch the game and I am acutely aware of the role the manager plays, But in my opinion, I think at times some folk think they can effect things more than they really can.....just remember, all these players are capable of coaching lower level teams, they know the score.

Personally, for various reasons I think the inconsistency surrounding our No9 position in the traditional sense has cost us....in terms of the shape of the team that is where, i think we have been weak and weak enough to just deny us promotion.....other players have been more than good enough to have got us up.....I also think that same position has had a knock on effect to have seen the wingers who we have relied on some much run out of fuel....they have had to work too hard for too long.

I welcome other views.....I think VR made some good points with his theories.

I think to keep saying crap manager, no idea of tactics is cheap.....I don't think John Terry with his options would have associated himself with a duffer, I really don't.

In conclusion....I think overall the team was good enough....I think we lacked ONE player in a crucial role that left us short.

We was like our teams without Peter Withe or without Andy Gray.....It has such a knock on effect.

If that was the managers fault for not getting such a player then I blame him for that.

Edited May 29, 2018 by TRO

[bobzy]

13 minutes ago, AntrimBlack said:

I do not understand how anyone can think that Bruce will suddenly bring in the younger players and change his whole footballing philosophy to an offensive game.

He played younger players this season and we finished as 3rd highest scorers in the division. 

The only thing that won’t change is the antiquated views of Steve Bruce. 

[bobzy]

10 minutes ago, Wainy316 said:

We beat all the top 3 at home but as soon as we play anyone half decent away from home we set up to fail.  Far too defensive and that thought process for the first half on Saturday will harm us for years to come.

We started with 2 strikers against Wolves away from home didn’t we? It meant we sacrificed midfield though and were completely overrun. 

In the return fixture, we played with a 3 man centre mid and 1 up top and it was much more effective. Probably not more attacking, though?

[Villarocker]

3 hours ago, striker said:

While I accept your point on the difference between playing against 10 men for an hour rather than 20 minutes Villa played much better in the second half against eleven than they did 10 because Fulham were still going forward when they could which left them more open.

When they went down to 10 they parked the bus and Villa really struggled to create anything which imo would have still happened if they’d been down to 10 for an hour.

I respect your opinion mate but, for me, the heat of the day and the Villa pressure would have taken its toll on Fulham at some point if they had an additional 40 minutes playing with only 10 men. Also, I think Bruce would have made his attacking changes a lot sooner, which would have helped us get back into the game.

[Villarocker]

15 minutes ago, Wainy316 said:

We beat all the top 3 at home but as soon as we play anyone half decent away from home we set up to fail.  Far too defensive and that thought process for the first half on Saturday will harm us for years to come.

This is exactly the problem. We have paid too much respect to the better teams in the league this season and paid the price for it. I don't really mind him getting the team to stay tight after going a goal up but going into the games that way is just setting us up to get beat, IF that is what he does. It certainly seems that way as we did it too many times to make it feel like coincidence.

I have no worries about Bruce staying just as long as he gets that defensive philosophy out of his head and allows us to play with the freedom to attack teams. However, to do this he has to change our slow players as they are the Achilles heel of the team.

[Ingram85]

28 minutes ago, AntrimBlack said:

Of course. It usually is the case , though, and the last couple of seasons would seem to indicate that Wyness and Bruce would fall into that category.

Definitely agree but I just meant more writing off other older people.

[thabucks]

http://www.thefa.com/about-football-association/st-georges-park/discover/education/the-future-game/playing-philosophy

to back up my point regarding Bruce's failings this is the Fa's coaching ethos . 

 

[meregreen]

With Bruce it was always going to be promotion or go. His style of football is turgid. Without an end product, I simply don’t want to sit through another season of such awful football.