Steve Bruce

[dn1982]

50 minutes ago, Grasshopper said:

The way I see it is this.

We NEED promotion this season. If we dont go up we need to change our approach from quick fix to long term growth.

The questions are

1 is Bruce capable of getting us 2nd?

I think no

2 is Bruce capable of 3rd-6th?

Maybe yes (in theory) but I honestly think no.

3 if we get to the playoffs, would we beat 2 of those 3-6th positioned teams?

If they were Burton, Sha or Sunderland I like to think YES

if they come from a pool of Cardiff, Derby, BristolC, SheffU, Boro or Leeds I‘d say NO

4 next season is a new ball game and a long term build would be our best bet. Is Bruce capable of a ling ternm build? 

I‘d say No

5 If its the case, we dont go up, is the present board capable of seeing a long term plan through (ie choosing someone, budgeting accordingly and showing leadership for the club to „go that way“ in support of a manager and making clarity for fans, new players, youth and sponsors to get on board for the long haul)

IMHO

Bruce as manager no (he woukd be sacked for failing anyway)

Wyness as CEO ? - this is my deepest concern.

If Wyness (for example) has the mentality to try something different (indeed Bruce was different to RDM) and go after a different type of new guy then why not? if he‘s stuck in his ways and goes for a Bruce Mkii then he must go too.

All to play for with a change, only the change has to be decisive and along the right lines.

if that means Bruce & Wyness must go, then so be it.

I think forget all your other stuff number 2 is the right one. Will Bruce get us into the top 2 now? No chance for me and he’s shown nothing in 15 months to say we will go up in the playoffs. If we changed manger now I still believe results won’t get any worse with the squad we have so I don’t think it’s that big a gamble to change now. Hopefully a new manager can get us playing a style which can see us better off against the big teams by the end of this season. Last year Bruce had 12 odd games where it was obvious we weren’t getting into the playoff spot and he should’ve used it to get us playing good football he never and we now know it’s because he can’t. Let’s not make the same mistake again. 

Edited December 28, 2017 by dn1982

[peterms]

16 minutes ago, imavillan said:

Ultimately its the managers responsibility for everything to do with the footballing side of the club...

This is no different to any manager in the world of business.

I'd say it's more that the Board is responsible for strategic direction, and the manager for operational management and implementation of the strategy.  Like in the world of business.

The choice of manager was an expression of what you might call the strategy a year ago.  Get someone in who has been promoted before, that should work.  Get up, then change it all around so we stay up.  And it might have worked, perhaps; but probably won't.   He has adopted a dour, negative style, has failed to enthuse the fans and achieve consistency on the pitch, and it seems is pretty much certain to miss the target of automatic promotion.

Questions should be asked of the Board about why they chose this approach.  It's not as though what Bruce has done was a complete change from what he's done elsewhere.  The main difference is that he has previously managed to achieve promotions, but that looks pretty unlikely now.  Selecting him looks like gambling that his previous successes would be repeated, that it would be possible to get up amd then rebuild the squad and change the approach so we stayed up, and go from there, but the gamble doesn't look like working.

[TRO]

5 hours ago, terrytini said:

As for why it’s occassionally good - well, a stopped clock is right twice a day.

And those “ good” performances have in reality been pitifully few IMO.

Thats a weak reponse Terry....

but yes, they have been few and far between.

my point is, there have been games where all the things we are complaining about, have been generally  right.....so they all know the difference between right and wrong and that includes public enemy no 1.....if, some of the things were true, like coaching or set up, etc.....we wouldn't win a game.

I have no agenda....just looking for answers.

I still think he will go after Bristol City......but not sure in the long run we will get what we think we are after.

Edited December 28, 2017 by TRO

[USA_Villa]

The Villa Board

In case you're interested, here's link to Dean Smith on the training field coaching his team. This is what we want to see from our manager.

https://www.brentfordfc.com/news/2017/december/20171215---training/

Video
PRE-BARNSLEY TRAINING
16 December 2017

Brentford FC

Training continues at Jersey Road.

Video Brentford vs Barnsley on 16 Dec 17
 

 

[srsmithusa]

Just now, TRO said:

Thats a weak reponse Terry....

but yes, they have been few and far between.

my point is, there have been games where all the things we are complaining about, have been right.....so they all know the difference between right and wrong and that includes public enemy no 1.....if, some of the things were true, like coaching or set up, etc.....we wouldn't win a game.

I have no agenda....just looking for answers.

I still think he will go after Bristol City......but not sure in the long run we will get what we think we are after.

So you want a guarantee of future success?  Good luck with that.  

[Villarocker]

1 hour ago, TRO said:

I don't subscribe to that at all in any way shape or form.

One of the most passionate players we ever had...Andy Gray was a rangers fan.

He was more passionate about scoring for Villa than, say Gabby.

some of the best players or managers have never had any previous emotional involvement in our club......They possibly build it here.

They are professionals, they have their own reputations to follow.

You surprised me there TRO. 

You don't think Smith would try any harder to make Villa a success than he would any other club? Surely if it's your own team there is more than just professionalism involved?

[TRO]

3 minutes ago, peterms said:

I'd say it's more that the Board is responsible for strategic direction, and the manager for operational management and implementation of the strategy.  Like in the world of business.

The choice of manager was an expression of what you might call the strategy a year ago.  Get someone in who has been promoted before, that should work.  Get up, then change it all around so we stay up.  And it might have worked, perhaps; but probably won't.   He has adopted a dour, negative style, has failed to enthuse the fans and achieve consistency on the pitch, and it seems is pretty much certain to miss the target of automatic promotion.

Questions should be asked of the Board about why they chose this approach.  It's not as though what Bruce has done was a complete change from what he's done elsewhere.  The main difference is that he has previously managed to achieve promotions, but that looks pretty unlikely now.  Selecting him looks like gambling that his previous successes would be repeated, that it would be possible to get up amd then rebuild the squad and change the approach so we stayed up, and go from there, but the gamble doesn't look like working.

I think the immediate problem of haemorraging goals at crucial times and dropping points, was upper most in their minds.....eradicating pain eases the memory.

We can't seem to move forward, despite trying.

The decision was possibly right at the time....now it looks dubious.

We can't look back, only forward.

If they ( the hierarchy) feel that its right for him to go, he will go.

We have to rely on their judgment, they are closest to it, its down to them.

[TRO]

8 minutes ago, srsmithusa said:

So you want a guarantee of future success?  Good luck with that.  

And where has that been intimated other than your mind.

[TRO]

5 minutes ago, villarocker said:

You surprised me there TRO. 

You don't think Smith would try any harder to make Villa a success than he would any other club? Surely if it's your own team there is more than just professionalism involved?

Despite the absolute tripe we are watching.....who can say Bruce is not trying his best....he has already said its the job he always wanted.....and that is not enough, i know that....but we cannot be sure Smith is the white knight either.

Look.....we are all speculating, mainly through frustration and anger.

but we are all coming up with theories, we are just speculating with.

If there are facts, fine i will listen

[Rob182]

3 hours ago, srsmithusa said:

Your expectations are far too low.  IMO.  

Beating this horse again.... this IS the villa curse.   Our board, our manager, our players, and even fans tolerate crappy performance.  It’s explained away with excuses.  (He’s played well often lately, we have injuries, they just parked the bus, still bedding into a new role ).  

There’s not enough accountability.   Until that stops, the “curse” will remain.  That’s why letting Bruce continue is making things worse every minute. He’s not producing football or the targeted results, but that is accepted.   ( don’t tell me it’s not accepted, it has been excused and rationalized for months on this forum, and he’s still drawing a pay check. The manager is not held accountable by the board.  The players are not held accountable by the manager.  Rarely, they may be held accountable by themselves, but not transparently.  

Its why changing owner, board, manager, coaches, and roster doesn’t change anything.    There is no accountability for folly, so there is no drive toward excellence. 

Why are my expectations too low? Please explain that to me. I think my expectations are right there in the ‘realistic’ camp. I have no strong feelings towards Bruce that makes me want us to keep him longer than necessary, but I also think that Bruce is being kept in charge with the hope that he can put together another impressive run of wins, like the last time the calls for his head became this loud.

 

I’ve said earlier today that I want Bruce to get at least 4 points from the next two games, and for us to get back into the play-off places in those two games.

 

Are my expectations too low because I’m not calling for Bruce to be sacked today? If so, when did you think that Bruce should have been sacked? Just this week after the latest loss... or a few weeks ago after the loss to Derby?... or maybe back when we drew 3 games in a row against Bristol, Brentford and Middlesbrough?

[peterms]

4 minutes ago, TRO said:

I think the immediate problem of haemorraging goals at crucial times and dropping points, was upper most in their minds

No doubt that was an immediate concern.

The big question, the strategic question,  was what to do about planning the future direction of the club.

Some on here were in favour of choosing a young, ambitious manager with potential and building from there - we had discussions about people like Wagner.

What the Board chose to do was reflected in Wyness' comments about building three teams, one to get up, one to stay up, one to challenge.

In other words they chose a short term, bet-the-firm strategy, gambling on an immediate return to the top tier.  If it had worked, it would have meant taking apart the management and playing staff and rebuilding quickly once promoted, and I'm not sure how realistic that would have been.

But it seems we will have to rebuild anyway, if (as many of us think) we miss promotion.  I don't see a clear strategy and a wise approach in any of this, more a combination of bombast, hope, and superstition.

I've been disappointed with Bruce, but I think he's far from the only person who is failing here.

[Villarocker]

20 minutes ago, dn1982 said:

Last year Bruce had 12 odd games where it was obvious we weren’t getting into the playoff spot and he should’ve used it to get us playing good football he never and we now know it’s because he can’t. Let’s not make the same mistake again. 

This is the key thing for me, where Steve Bruce is concerned. For me, he and his coaching staff have shown no development of a playing style since they have been here. It simply seems like a dogged approach to every game where they want to keep it tight and try to take any opportunities that may come our way.

If the above is down to him not trusting the defence hen surely he needs to take full blame for that. Elmo, Bree, Taylor, Samba, Terry and the keeper are all his players. Chester was our best defender last season and been great again this season so nothing bad can be said about him. Bruce also brought in Whelan, Lansbury, Onomah and Hourihane so if he feels the midfield doesn't hive enough cover then that is also down to him because they are his players. 

I just don't ever see Bruce developing a style of football that is good enough to beat the better teams in this league. We only seem to beat the lesser teams just by the fact that we are better individually than they are. 

Surely a new manager cannot make this bunch of players perform any worse than we have seen from them? Surely they can only improve as a team from having someone managing them into a unit that plays a certain style of football that is beyond just hoofing it into the big striker and hoping he can hold it up long enough for others to join the attack?

[Guest av1]

2 hours ago, NurembergVillan said:

This is an easy narrative to default to, but just isn't true.

Since we got relegated Newcastle, Middlesbrough, Norwich, Wolves and Hull have all spent not inconsiderable amounts of money too.

Yes we've spent a chunk more than most Championship clubs (and should be expecting a far better return than we've had so far), but to suggest that we've massively outspent everyone else in the league is something of a misdirection.

Its also worth remembering contract situations though mate. 

In terms of fees onlone, Hogan, Kodjia, Chester, Adomah all stand out. But we also took advantage of contacts coming to a end. Whilst:

Hurihane

Lansbury

Terry

Bree

Taylor

Etc didn't cost a awful lot in terms off fees's

There aren't many championship clubs that could afford to bring these guys in. Man City of the championship may be stretching it a little, but we have players in the books that cost more than the whole squads of some of our competitor's.  

Our position relative to our outlay is embarrassing imo, as such i don't think automatic promotion is an unreasonable expectation. 

 B

Bruce is falling.

 

[srsmithusa]

1 minute ago, TRO said:

And where has that been intimated other than your mind.

“I still think he will go after Bristol City......but not sure in the long run we will get what we think we are after”

Perhaps I misunderstood your intent?

 

 

[srsmithusa]

23 minutes ago, Rob182 said:

Why are my expectations too low? Please explain that to me. I think my expectations are right there in the ‘realistic’ camp. I have no strong feelings towards Bruce that makes me want us to keep him longer than necessary, but I also think that Bruce is being kept in charge with the hope that he can put together another impressive run of wins, like the last time the calls for his head became this loud.

 

I’ve said earlier today that I want Bruce to get at least 4 points from the next two games, and for us to get back into the play-off places in those two games.

 

Are my expectations too low because I’m not calling for Bruce to be sacked today? If so, when did you think that Bruce should have been sacked? Just this week after the latest loss... or a few weeks ago after the loss to Derby?... or maybe back when we drew 3 games in a row against Bristol, Brentford and Middlesbrough?

IMO your expectations are too low because you said

”What I have seen with my own eyes, is that (as I mentioned a few posts ago), since October we have been in the play-off positions. That was the bare minimum that Bruce should achieve. We've had decent runs too. Unbeaten in 10 at one stage, when we also won 4 out of 5 games. Unbeaten in 5 a few weeks ago, including three 2-goal wins against QPR, Ipswich and Sunderland, until we lost to Derby. We've had our good spells, even if the crap football has made some people still question whether  .....

Some “Good spells” and “bare minimum” is IMO setting a rather low bar.   

Edited December 28, 2017 by srsmithusa

[TRO]

28 minutes ago, peterms said:

No doubt that was an immediate concern.

The big question, the strategic question,  was what to do about planning the future direction of the club.

Some on here were in favour of choosing a young, ambitious manager with potential and building from there - we had discussions about people like Wagner.

What the Board chose to do was reflected in Wyness' comments about building three teams, one to get up, one to stay up, one to challenge.

In other words they chose a short term, bet-the-firm strategy, gambling on an immediate return to the top tier.  If it had worked, it would have meant taking apart the management and playing staff and rebuilding quickly once promoted, and I'm not sure how realistic that would have been.

But it seems we will have to rebuild anyway, if (as many of us think) we miss promotion.  I don't see a clear strategy and a wise approach in any of this, more a combination of bombast, hope, and superstition.

I've been disappointed with Bruce, but I think he's far from the only person who is failing here.

I simply don't know.....I can hazard a guess, but what use is that.

When we have had turgid pasts, in the past......I don't remember any declaration of a blue print or plan......Don't ever remember, Leicester, declaring to the world their master plan either, quite frankly, i think its pie in the sky.....in a rigid form anyway.

Never remenber any of our successful managers declaring in advance a blueprint and emulated it in practice.

There are so many factors and combinations of events that would resemble a Kaleidoscope, I think it is self indulgent to take that every thing that happens is by design.....its wishful thinking.....many mistakes can  turn out for the best, it happens.

maybe a framework, but thats all.

example.....how many players have we planned to sign ,failed and the alternative has proved to be a stunning success.....Peter Withe, springs to mind.....thats not planning, its events favouring the decision......but few like the idea of that, because it lacks control....it lacks premeditation, it lacks glory.

Luck plays a major part.

ps For those that can't read between the lines......I'm not saying its all about luck either.

 

Edited December 28, 2017 by TRO

[dn1982]

23 minutes ago, villarocker said:

This is the key thing for me, where Steve Bruce is concerned. For me, he and his coaching staff have shown no development of a playing style since they have been here. It simply seems like a dogged approach to every game where they want to keep it tight and try to take any opportunities that may come our way.

If the above is down to him not trusting the defence hen surely he needs to take full blame for that. Elmo, Bree, Taylor, Samba, Terry and the keeper are all his players. Chester was our best defender last season and been great again this season so nothing bad can be said about him. Bruce also brought in Whelan, Lansbury, Onomah and Hourihane so if he feels the midfield doesn't hive enough cover then that is also down to him because they are his players. 

I just don't ever see Bruce developing a style of football that is good enough to beat the better teams in this league. We only seem to beat the lesser teams just by the fact that we are better individually than they are. 

Surely a new manager cannot make this bunch of players perform any worse than we have seen from them? Surely they can only improve as a team from having someone managing them into a unit that plays a certain style of football that is beyond just hoofing it into the big striker and hoping he can hold it up long enough for others to join the attack?

I actually think with Terry coming back in we will get to the playoffs regardless who is manager If he stays fit but can’t see us beating the top teams under Bruce. Bruce will go In the summer if we don’t go up so let’s get a manager in and give them this 4 months to get a style and you never know we may get some momentum and actually win the playoffs. Either way we will be in a better position by the start of next season. 

Edited December 28, 2017 by dn1982

[Rob182]

16 minutes ago, srsmithusa said:

IMO your expectations are too low because you said

”What I have seen with my own eyes, is that (as I mentioned a few posts ago), since October we have been in the play-off positions. That was the bare minimum that Bruce should achieve. We've had decent runs too. Unbeaten in 10 at one stage, when we also won 4 out of 5 games. Unbeaten in 5 a few weeks ago, including three 2-goal wins against QPR, Ipswich and Sunderland, until we lost to Derby. We've had our good spells, even if the crap football has made some people still question whether  .....

Some “Good spells” and “bare minimum” is IMO setting a rather low bar.   

So when would you have sacked Bruce then?

 

(If you’d read all my posts, and the conversation that lead to the post of mine that you quoted, you’ll see that I mentioned, numerous times, that Bruce is underachieving and that the aim at the start of the season was automatic promotion).

[foreveryoung]

For me as I have witnessed, if a team is not winning consistently and the board has there eyes on promotion, the manager gets sacked. No talk of players being good enough, or weather the board know what they are doing, I think we are looking to much into this as fans.

Right or wrong the manager is seen to be responsible for the loses, so the manager gets fired, period.

[terrytini]

1 hour ago, TRO said:

Thats a weak reponse Terry....

but yes, they have been few and far between.

my point is, there have been games where all the things we are complaining about, have been generally  right.....so they all know the difference between right and wrong and that includes public enemy no 1.....if, some of the things were true, like coaching or set up, etc.....we wouldn't win a game.

I have no agenda....just looking for answers.

I still think he will go after Bristol City......but not sure in the long run we will get what we think we are after.

What’s weak about it ? I’m just giving my view on your query as to if it’s the coaching how come we’ve occassionally played well. My view is simply that it’s bound to have happened a couple of times .

Why is that weak ?

Personally I think your deduction that if the coaching was a problem we would never win a game makes no sense.

There are countless examples where poor teams , relegated teams, poor players, poorly managed teams, give a decent performance or two.

I would raise the opposite point. If the coaching isn’t negative and poor how come I’ve only seen a handful (/at best) of even decent performances in 50 odd games ?

Youve said for 15 months it’s the players.

All these different players, players already here, players he’s bought in, International players, experienced players, players with good records in this League. Everything except the obvious conclusion - as experienced by fans at other Clubs he’s managed.

I think the evidence is crystal clear and has been for ages, and really wonder why some have taken so long to see it.

Still weak ?