Steve Bruce

[briny_ear]

2 hours ago, Demitri_C said:

im not teally interested in the name calling side of it. Personally i am more interested in his performance on the pitch. Bruce win ratio is 41.03% which only MON and Gregory have bettered (slightly i might add) 

Bruce needs to do better i agree but the way he gets slated on here you think he was as woeful as di matteo,  lambert and sherwood. 

That list is a bit of a shocker, isn't it.

I'm going to have to lie down for a while having read through that. 

How the hell did Lambert survive so long with that record?

[Stevo985]

8 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

I would argue that it is definitely true. Lets present the situations.

Lambert came in after Mcleish who was massively unpopular and was majority of the fans number one choice at the time. He had the fans on side. The team wasnt THAT bad at the time. He had to do cost cutting but he was backed with signing players and found a gem in Tekkers. he had 3 seasons to get it right and we slid into mediocrity before he was removed.

Sherwood even worse. He was backed with 50m and absolutely was a complete failure. We all know how bad he was.

Bruce came in after a side that only one two league games all season and were hopeless losers. Di matteo mustered one win against the worst team in the league and continued the losing mentality and could not egt us winning consistently.  

Bruce had a team of losers who were mentality weak and had no belief and forgot how to win games. He literally cleared the losing menatlity at the club and for first time got us winning back ti back games. It was almighty tough. He has made a lot of mistakes and needs to do better but for me was tougher than both as neither had to pick up a side that had been relegated and no belief.

You're implying that it was harder for Bruce to get a good win % than Lambert or Sherwood. You are wrong for many many reasons, not least the fact that the other two WERE IN THE PREMIER LEAGUE where it is obviously harder to get results. If you can't grasp that then I'll bow out of the conversation

9 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

 

Because you said any half decent manager "any half decent manager could produce a win % that would put him high on the list compared to other Villa managers" Rafa was expected to walk this league and he didn't with a very strong squad, so my point is its not as simple as that.  

I still don't follow how Rafa's performance at Newcastle has any bearing on what I said about Villa managers' win percentages.

[TRO]

17 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

I totally disagree on two elements.

Firstly, we weren't talking about comparing win percentages over a manager's career. We were talking about comparing Bruce's win % at Villa with people like Lambert or Sherwood's win % at Villa. There is a HUGE variable in that comparison which makes it basically irrelevant. It's like saying Bruce is doing an ok job if he had the same win % as Lambert (assuming you thought Lambert did an ok job, again that's up for debate but I'm making a point). You'd be completely disregardng the strength of the team relative to the league and the additional expectation that that brings.

 

Secondly, if we were comparing a manager's career win %, then you'd STILL need to factor in the leagues they were in and the teams they were managing.I'm sure there's a manager with a very convincing win % who's never managed above League 2 level. Would he be a better manager than, say, Mark Hughes who, without researching, I'm assuming has a pretty modest win % but who has consistently managed in the top flight.

 

You can only use win % as a fair barometer if all other conditions remain relatively constant. You could compare Alex Ferguson's win % in the Premier League with Arsene Wenger's win % in the premier league and make a relatively fair comparison.
You couldn't compare Alex Ferguson's win % in the Premier League with Neil Warnock's win % in the Championship and make any sort of comparison.

sorry Stevo .....once again I have to disagree.

You can.....but it would be each managers ability to win in their own league.....IF, IF the sample size was just one club.

Neil Warnock's wins are being judged in the lower league against same opposition.

Alex Fergusons's wins are being judged in the higher league against same opposition.....( If it was in the cup with mixed leagues , i would tend to agree)

Its no harder or easier for Alex Ferguson to win than Neil Warnock( when the season kicks off).....and its still a measure of their work.

The win ratio is a constant that judges that ratio in THAT league against your own opposition, no cross boundaries.....other outside influences are irrelevant.

Thats My opinion on it.

Edited September 26, 2017 by TRO

[dn1982]

56 minutes ago, TRO said:

I think you are worrying too much and i say that respectfully.

Half of this team have just started playing with each other.....its slow but its looking better.

I watched Albion last night and despite their resillience ( Which Pulis has introduced) they had no individual brilliance as you say.....don't knock it, its great to have players who can swivel away from opponents and have the footwork to cause problems.....Its worth its weight in Gold.

We may rely on Kodjia for the guile and we need more, but Adomah is starting to settle, snoddy is capable but not there fitness wise, and Jack may be better when he comes back in to a more confident team team.

We have Davis,O'Hare and Doyle Hayes all learning their craft and showing great signs with their techniques and footwork.

We as a fan base have had so many false dawns and set backs.....it shows and we need to have a bit more faith.....Confidence is contagious, sadly meloncholy is too.

We all know we are not perfect, but lets build on the positives and let the club deal with the neggies on a incremental basis.

Its our job to enjoy ourselves.....and whilst many of the neggy comments may well be right, lets not bog ourselves down with them too much and embrace the pozzies.....we owe it to ourselves.

Just remember, irrespective of your view on the manager.....but who motivates the manager( they are only human too) that applies to any manager, not just ours.

and tonight whether we win, lose or draw......it is not a barometer for the season.....its just another brick in or out of the wall.

 

The last 2 results have been great but the performances haven't improved that much. We still can't dominate games consistently. I like others can't see it changing so i hope we have enough resilience to keep us in games to allow our flair players to win enough games. 

[dn1982]

45 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

I think that also applies to a lot of teams in this league though, for example look at Chris wood at Leeds last season. they relied quite heavily on him. To be honest with you though I dont actually agree with that point for this season. Last year we relied on big koj getting the goals. But this yeah adomah and hourihane have scored goals as has davis. so recently other areas of the team are helping with the goals

 

Cherry picking the most recent and relevant form? 

Leeds last year played better football than us and this year they're flying. Wood is a great example he's a lump of a striker that relies on others creating for him where as ours especially Kodija last season have to do it all them selves. Kodija doesn't get many tap ins or headers. 

[Stevo985]

Just now, TRO said:

sorry Stevo .....once again I have to disagree.

You can

Neil Warnock's wins are being judged in the lower league against same opposition.

Alex Fergusons's wins are being judged in the higher league against same opposition.....( If it was in the cup with mixed leagues , i would tend to agree)

Its no harder or easier for Alex Ferguson to win than Neil Warnock( when the season kicks off).....and its still a measure of their work.

The win ratio is a constant that judges that ratio in THAT league against your own opposition, no cross boundaries.....other outside influences are irrelevant.

Thats My opinion on it.

So let's say, for argument's sake, Ferguson's win% in his career was the same as Warnock's, even though Warnock spent most of his career in the lower leagues and Ferguson in the top flight.

Can't you see how you could NOT use that as a barometer of their success?

[TRO]

8 minutes ago, terrytini said:

Personally I think it's as daft to suggest things are looking good as it is to suggest they remain dreadful.

IMO we are at something of a crossroads. Over the next few games things could easily go either way.

Those who think it's " all coming together" need to ask themselves whether we are just seeing the Kodja effect like we did last year.

Those who think it's just a couple of good results against poor sides can reflect on Bruces " confession" that he HAS deliberately been negative/cautious/defensive ( too much so IMO) but that he now feels that's all behind us - great if - very very belatedly - true.

His record, percentages or not, has been somewhere between poor and average, as has the football.

We have a very good first 14 and a good squad - it's been poorly used but there are signs he is finally realising that.

He lost it with those comments about hysteria. But he's reigned back on those too now.

The 'window' - of opportunity as I saw it - to get rid of him is, in my view, gone. We will regret it I think, in that he will get some results but nowhere near enough.

However, gone it is. I think we are stuck - or blessed - with him now.

Tonight is a great opportunity against a lowly side to show he means business.

 

I think that is a fair post Terry.

may I just add, that Kodjia is arguably our best player technically, so it would follow that any team would be missing a player of that calibre......we can't judge the team with comments when he is in or when he is out.....he's part of the team a valuable part.....as is Jedinak in a different sense.

Many teams look different with their best player missing.

The Hysteria comments were aimed at social media and he just came out to clarify it......those that thought he meant us all, were just suiting their own agenda.

I think tonights game is one I would expect something from, however they have beaten Fulham and Sheff Wed I think and they can play the ball quite well, lost 1 in 6 I think, so lets not get too carried away.

another good result would be great.

I think a win against any side in this division at present ( early season) is a good win.

[Demitri_C]

17 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

You're implying that it was harder for Bruce to get a good win % than Lambert or Sherwood. You are wrong for many many reasons, not least the fact that the other two WERE IN THE PREMIER LEAGUE where it is obviously harder to get results. If you can't grasp that then I'll bow out of the conversation

I still don't follow how Rafa's performance at Newcastle has any bearing on what I said about Villa managers' win percentages.

Yea we are not going to agree on this. I think your wrong and you think i am wrong so we leave it there.

Like brentford a stalemate.

[Stevo985]

1 minute ago, Demitri_C said:

Yea we are not going to agree on this. I think your wrong and you think i am wrong so we leave it there.

Like brentford a stalemate.

Put it this way, Dem.

If Bruce had exactly the same win percentage as Paul Lambert had, would you conclude they had performed to the same level?

[Demitri_C]

13 minutes ago, dn1982 said:

Leeds last year played better football than us and this year they're flying. Wood is a great example he's a lump of a striker that relies on others creating for him where as ours especially Kodija last season have to do it all them selves. Kodija doesn't get many tap ins or headers. 

They did at most parts but they failed last year considering where they were.  I would like to think that we now dont have to heavily rely on kodjia to get the goals as adomah, hourinahe, and snods can hopefully help with that. Also we have tgreats in davis, terry and chester. 

[lexicon]

Leeds usually have a great patch in a season before falling apart later on, I wouldn't take this vein of form to mean anything and at this stage of the season it doesn't mean much. 

[Demitri_C]

1 minute ago, Stevo985 said:

Put it this way, Dem.

If Bruce had exactly the same win percentage as Paul Lambert had, would you conclude they had performed to the same level?

Im looking at nit just level though stevo i am looking at circumstances of the team. We were woeful when we went down we struggled to beat sides like huddesfield and brentford (again frustratingly) and humilated by luton in the cup. That shows how fragile we were.

Yes the level is tougher in premier league, however we didnt have that losing/non belief mentality. Di matteo and bruce both highlighted the losing mentality that was here.

I dont think that win ratio should be looked at just because we are in the championship

[Stevo985]

1 minute ago, Demitri_C said:

Im looking at nit just level though stevo i am looking at circumstances of the team. We were woeful when we went down we struggled to beat sides like huddesfield and brentford (again frustratingly) and humilated by luton in the cup. That shows how fragile we were.

Yes the level is tougher in premier league, however we didnt have that losing/non belief mentality. Di matteo and bruce both highlighted the losing mentality that was here.

I dont think that win ratio should be looked at just because we are in the championship

Soooooo... is that a yes or a no?

[TRO]

19 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

So let's say, for argument's sake, Ferguson's win% in his career was the same as Warnock's, even though Warnock spent most of his career in the lower leagues and Ferguson in the top flight.

Can't you see how you could NOT use that as a barometer of their success?

I can see your point, but I hope you can see mine.

If they both had the same % ratio's, you could glean, that with factors in their respective leagues both had done an equally good job.

If it was a case of choosing a replacement for Alex Ferguson......then while Neil's win ratio would not go unnoticed many other factors would be considered like, can he handle big named millionaires, can he talent spot at this level....and so on.

The ability to win a game in your respective league or country against games played is still a valued piece of criteria.

I guess its very difficult to arrange a perfect comparison with a business which attracts a kaleidoscope of variables.....but every bit helps and I think win ratio's do.

ps with equal win ratios would i rate Neil equal with Alex as a manager......NO.....because more information is needed particularly crossing  leagues.

pps I am also saying one piece of criteria like wins ratios is not conclusive evidence.....its just a factor to consider.

Edited September 26, 2017 by TRO

[AntrimBlack]

1 hour ago, Stevo985 said:

Interestingly, though, I'm fairly confident the form guide you're talking about will have us in the top 6 by Saturday evening.

I'm good with that.

[Stevo985]

Just now, TRO said:

I can see your point, but I hope you can see mine.

If they both had the same % ratio's, you could glean, that with factors in their respective leagues both had done an equally good job.

Exactly right. Within the context of their respective leagues.

Hence, comparing Bruce's ratio with people like Lambert and Sherwood's ratio and not factoring in the context of their respective leagues, is not a fair comparison

[TRO]

7 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

Exactly right. Within the context of their respective leagues.

Hence, comparing Bruce's ratio with people like Lambert and Sherwood's ratio and not factoring in the context of their respective leagues, is not a fair comparison

But equally Steve I think Sherwoods was a bit distorted any way.....he had 50% at Spurs in such a small sample and well we know what happened with us.......but generally not enough games to get a mean difference.

[Taxahunter]

My concern is not possesion, we can have 30% possesion from now on and the rest of our games if we generate goal scoring opportunities and score goals, my concern is that we are NOT generating enough goal scoring chances to win games if the opposition is scoring a goal against us and yes I know we won saturday, even though Forest scored, but how many open chances did we create? Not many that i remeber. One goal scored, created with a beautiful threaded pass and one goal from a free kick, that wasnt that well taken, a wall positioned wrongly and a goalkeeper that really should have taken the shot, IMO.

Furthermore we are sitting way to deep, letting the opposition dictate play, I noticed several times saturday, that our strikers was pulled back and had to pressure from the circle on our own half and that is just wrong and will just add pressure to our midfield and backline, because there is no pressure on our opponents defence letting them move the ball around.

[VILLAMARV]

39 minutes ago, terrytini said:

Personally I think it's as daft to suggest things are looking good as it is to suggest they remain dreadful.

IMO we are at something of a crossroads. Over the next few games things could easily go either way.

Those who think it's " all coming together" need to ask themselves whether we are just seeing the Kodja effect like we did last year.

Those who think it's just a couple of good results against poor sides can reflect on Bruces " confession" that he HAS deliberately been negative/cautious/defensive ( too much so IMO) but that he now feels that's all behind us - great if - very very belatedly - true.

His record, percentages or not, has been somewhere between poor and average, as has the football.

We have a very good first 14 and a good squad - it's been poorly used but there are signs he is finally realising that.

He lost it with those comments about hysteria. But he's reigned back on those too now.

The 'window' - of opportunity as I saw it - to get rid of him is, in my view, gone. We will regret it I think, in that he will get some results but nowhere near enough.

However, gone it is. I think we are stuck - or blessed - with him now.

Tonight is a great opportunity against a lowly side to show he means business.

 

That's it for me. Win the next 2 games (as we should) and we'll be doing ok, nothing more. He has to keep picking up points, simple as that. Like any manager these days, Bruce is a bad run away from the sack, heightened in our case by the expectations of the club. And doubled by the financial implications of not making it up this year.

[sheepyvillian]

50 minutes ago, briny_ear said:

That list is a bit of a shocker, isn't it.

I'm going to have to lie down for a while having read through that. 

How the hell did Lambert survive so long with that record?

It's the football that's woeful.