Steve Bruce

[dont_do_it_doug.]

People are spaffing over Smith and Brentford almost purely on the basis we ourselves have struggled to handle them in 3 championship appearances. And that he's a Villa fan. They're just another mid table championship side. 

I mean fair play they do it on a tight budget. He's doing a good job. Nowhere near spectacular enough to be considered for the Villa job? Is there any evidence he could handle a big time squad such as this? 

Brentford have a very specific system, what input has he had in building that? I believe it was put in place under Warburton, who he is incidentally not doing as well as. 

I'm not interested in finishing 15th in the Championship. Come back to me when he has done something beyond the norm. 

[TRO]

12 hours ago, sheepyvillian said:

I was referring to your unconditional love of all things Bruce, another tongue in cheek gone to waste. 

Ah! but you would be wrong.....i don't do unconditional.

I just choose not to criticise, when I feel its not necessary....you conversely think it is, even though nothing changes and Steve Bruce plods along in his own simple way.

If you have any recollection of my posts, i have endorsed, yours,GH ,Trent, vretti and others who have criticised the quality and style of our play.I have never said you are wrong....I just think sitting 4th after a bad start and 19 games, something must be right

maybe we just can't see it.....is that a possibility?

where i differ from most of you, i think the players, play a bigger part in that than you say....having said that, the manager for sure has a major part to play too.

on "main event"last night....Paul Merson was asked is Man City's success purely down to Pepe or is it the players.....He said look, you have to have the players, pepe would not have turned my Walsall team in to anything, perhaps better than me ,yea..... but i accept he has probably made every player better, but it takes time.

it was then mooted that the best managers buy the best players....of course they do thats why they go to clubs with the most money....so its all interlinked...owner,manager,coaches,players.....it has to be integrated.

The simple fact is imo its all of them......they are a team themselves.

Ron Saunders and his team was a package, he built it, with his coaches and they delivered.

Thats why I simply do not subscribe to Steve Bruce holding us back, its his team, good or bad results....and many more are in it too.

 

 

 

[TRO]

3 minutes ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

People are spaffing over Smith and Brentford almost purely on the basis we ourselves have struggled to handle them in 3 championship appearances. And that he's a Villa fan. They're just another mid table championship side. 

I mean fair play they do it on a tight budget. He's doing a good job. Nowhere near spectacular enough to be considered for the Villa job? Is there any evidence he could handle a big time squad such as this? 

Brentford have a very specific system, what input has he had in building that? I believe it was put in place under Warburton, who he is incidentally not doing as well as. 

I'm not interested in finishing 15th in the Championship. Come back to me when he has done something beyond the norm. 

Totally agree Dave.

[carewjust4u]

2 hours ago, striker said:

I feel TRO you are not giving Villa players enough credit by again protecting the current Villa manager.

You only have to look at how the likes of Hourihane and Lansbury played for their previous clubs plus even James Bree at FB or indeed Laet. Throw in Onomah, Snodgrass, Adomah, Grealish and O'Hare plus Hogan who previously thrived on through balls and you have players who love the ball at their feet.

Of course there's plenty of scope for a Santos to come to Villa and play a more progressive game it just that Bruce chooses not to play that way.

I can see your logic, but i think you are over-simplyfing it.

I would point to guardiola last season, who tried to play his brand of football but didn't have the players. Yes, we have brilliant players, but it's very difficult to say that they can set up to play Nuno's style when these players have played English-football their whole careers.

[TRO]

3 hours ago, striker said:

I feel TRO you are not giving Villa players enough credit by again protecting the current Villa manager.

You only have to look at how the likes of Hourihane and Lansbury played for their previous clubs plus even James Bree at FB or indeed Laet. Throw in Onomah, Snodgrass, Adomah, Grealish and O'Hare plus Hogan who previously thrived on through balls and you have players who love the ball at their feet.

Of course there's plenty of scope for a Santos to come to Villa and play a more progressive game it just that Bruce chooses not to play that way.

I think our players are doing ok thanks in a style that we are playing.....He doesn't need protecting.

If you are asking me do they have the technical ability of the Key Wolves players, sorry in the main they don't.....There are exceptions of course....Kodge,Albert, Callum and in defence JT

I think if we attempted to play the same as Wolves, we would get undone.

but its hypothetical, because we don't and we are not likely to find out.

Managers play a way in which THEY feel is the best way to reach the Holy Grail....points.

I am not in a position to tell Steve Bruce,Tony Pulis or Sam Allardyce they are wrong....even our own John Gregory had the same tendencies.

IMO unless you have the very best technical players around, to be able to play the fluent game, you are in danger of finding yourself between a rock and a hard place and results go up and down like a whores draws.

As an example.....Brentford, played some decent stuff last night, brought on another forward when a defender may have been the prudent option and then capitulated in injury time.

I don't want that kind of football.....I want resillient, robust, well organised football, that I have seen much of ,over the years at VP.....to secure results.

The better football WILL be borne out of those results.

ps in fact the more time passes, i think stronger that Steve is on the right path.

Edited November 28, 2017 by TRO

[TRO]

5 minutes ago, carewjust4u said:

I can see your logic, but i think you are over-simplyfing it.

I would point to guardiola last season, who tried to play his brand of football but didn't have the players. Yes, we have brilliant players, but it's very difficult to say that they can set up to play Nuno's style when these players have played English-football their whole careers.

That was exactly what they was saying on " main event" on sky last night.

[sheepyvillian]

25 minutes ago, TRO said:

Ah! but you would be wrong.....i don't do unconditional.

I just choose not to criticise, when I feel its not necessary....you conversely think it is, even though nothing changes and Steve Bruce plods along in his own simple way.

If you have any recollection of my posts, i have endorsed, yours,GH ,Trent, vretti and others who have criticised the quality and style of our play.I have never said you are wrong....I just think sitting 4th after a bad start and 19 games, something must be right

maybe we just can't see it.....is that a possibility?

where i differ from most of you, i think the players, play a bigger part in that than you say....having said that, the manager for sure has a major part to play too.

on "main event"last night....Paul Merson was asked is Man City's success purely down to Pepe or is it the players.....He said look, you have to have the players, pepe would not have turned my Walsall team in to anything, perhaps better than me ,yea..... but i accept he has probably made every player better, but it takes time.

it was then mooted that the best managers buy the best players....of course they do thats why they go to clubs with the most money....so its all interlinked...owner,manager,coaches,players.....it has to be integrated.

The simple fact is imo its all of them......they are a team themselves.

Ron Saunders and his team was a package, he built it, with his coaches and they delivered.

Thats why I simply do not subscribe to Steve Bruce holding us back, its his team, good or bad results....and many more are in it too.

 

 

 

I did say ,"tongue in cheek ",if you recall my previous post . I'm  considering giving up on any future attempts at humour ,it's just going to waste ,and who wants to keep recycling it ? Not me, TRO . There as to be some reciprocity ,otherwise, well,....See above. 

[Vive_La_Villa]

35 minutes ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

People are spaffing over Smith and Brentford almost purely on the basis we ourselves have struggled to handle them in 3 championship appearances. And that he's a Villa fan. They're just another mid table championship side. 

I mean fair play they do it on a tight budget. He's doing a good job. Nowhere near spectacular enough to be considered for the Villa job? Is there any evidence he could handle a big time squad such as this? 

Brentford have a very specific system, what input has he had in building that? I believe it was put in place under Warburton, who he is incidentally not doing as well as. 

I'm not interested in finishing 15th in the Championship. Come back to me when he has done something beyond the norm. 

That's not entirely true. I've been impressed with the way they try to play everytime I see them. It's easy on the eye. 

But you're right he hasn't really proven himself as a manager and at Brentford he probably never will. 

[sheepyvillian]

4 hours ago, Demitri_C said:

Doesn't mean Smith would do anywhere near as well as Bruce has here. Smith has absolutely zero experience of managing a team this size, yes he might have a better style of football but that doesnt mean it would work here with this crop of players 

Ill stick with Bruce.  

I was going  twist ,but I've a feeling your bluffing. So can I stick with the better style of football ,please. 

[TRO]

4 minutes ago, sheepyvillian said:

I did say ,"tongue in cheek ",if you recall my previous post . I'm  considering giving up on any future attempts at humour ,it's just going to waste ,and who wants to keep recycling it ? Not me, TRO . There as to be some reciprocity ,otherwise, well,....See above. 

Sorry sheepy if i responded too seriously.

look, we could get beat on Friday and a new landscape appears.

We clearly have slightly different views and thats healthy.

I love the humour, so don't stop......i will just try to do better to get it.

[sheepyvillian]

7 minutes ago, TRO said:

Sorry sheepy if i responded too seriously.

look, we could get beat on Friday and a new landscape appears.

We clearly have slightly different views and thats healthy.

I love the humour, so don't stop......i will just try to do better to get it.

I think I'm safe in assuming, that wasn't tongue in cheek ?

[Vive_La_Villa]

19 minutes ago, sheepyvillian said:

I did say ,"tongue in cheek ",if you recall my previous post . I'm  considering giving up on any future attempts at humour ,it's just going to waste ,and who wants to keep recycling it ? Not me, TRO . There as to be some reciprocity ,otherwise, well,....See above. 

You need to be more sophisticated with your jokes

(if you read this thread yesterday you'd know what I'm talking about).

[vreitti]

1 hour ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

Is there any evidence he could handle a big time squad such as this? 

Is there really that much evidence yet that Bruce is able to handle this? I do recognise 'the turnaround', but I mean it's still early days. I won't comment further on Smith, as I know so little about him, but like you say, he's also doing okay, and doing so with a fraction of what Bruce has had at his disposal.

[sheepyvillian]

27 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

You need to be more sophisticated with your jokes

(if you read this thread yesterday you'd know what I'm talking about).

It's not jokes in that sense ,it's more a subtle humour, but yeah ,it can get lost in translation. 

[dont_do_it_doug.]

1 hour ago, vreitti said:

Is there really that much evidence yet that Bruce is able to handle this? I do recognise 'the turnaround', but I mean it's still early days. I won't comment further on Smith, as I know so little about him, but like you say, he's also doing okay, and doing so with a fraction of what Bruce has had at his disposal.

Yes. He has been around forever, he has managed 'stars' (or mature premier league standard players if you prefer) for a long old time, to varying degrees of success tbf, and I've never heard a bad word said about him. The fact that a couple of those players have followed him here and to other clubs says a fair bit about his ability to handle a dressing room. 

I'm not saying Smith can't. As you say though, he's doing 'ok' as in they finished 10th last season and are currently 14th. 

[dont_do_it_doug.]

2 hours ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

That's not entirely true. I've been impressed with the way they try to play everytime I see them. It's easy on the eye. 

But you're right he hasn't really proven himself as a manager and at Brentford he probably never will. 

As I've said they play a very specific system. They have a top to bottom remit, specific players for specific positions. We don't, currently, operate anything like that. 

We could if we really wanted but it's a huge gamble for a club like ours to take. 

As for being pretty on the eye - honestly couldn't care less right now but that debate has been done to death. 

[dont_do_it_doug.]

Re: all of the above my point was about Smith and his perceived ability. For now though Steve Bruce is doing a sterling job getting results and theres no way on earth they should or will sack him. 

[Demitri_C]

Just now, dont_do_it_doug. said:

Re: all of the above my point was about Smith and his perceived ability. For now though Steve Bruce is doing a sterling job getting results and theres no way on earth they should or will sack him. 

This is true. If bruce can keep up the current form where we win a majority of games and maybe slip up on a rare occasion or two i think we are going back to where we belong

[Vive_La_Villa]

8 minutes ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

As I've said they play a very specific system. They have a top to bottom remit, specific players for specific positions. We don't, currently, operate anything like that. 

We could if we really wanted but it's a huge gamble for a club like ours to take. 

As for being pretty on the eye - honestly couldn't care less right now but that debate has been done to death. 

We don't, but we should. But that's also a debate done to death so we'll leave it there. 

Also I doubt anybody is suggesting Bruce should be sacked right now either. He has done a good job since the Norwich game.

[dont_do_it_doug.]

2 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

We don't, but we should. But that's also a debate done to death so we'll leave it there. 

Also I doubt anybody is suggesting Bruce should be sacked right now either. He has done a good job since the Norwich game.

I must have missed that so I'll say this - it's all well and good wanting to implement a system like that and in an ideal world fine. But when you're entire plan revolves around getting back into the Premier League as fast as is humanly possible it's a big gamble to take. It could take a LONG time to get it right. 

If it was easy, every club would do it. Things are happening behind the scenes though, we are told.