Jump to content

Steve Bruce


Demitri_C

Recommended Posts

On 3/23/2018 at 19:56, Eastie said:

interesting comments from wyness at the supporters trust agm meeting  regarding Bruce .

All very much wait and see for now -

wyness and round were in attendance .

KW- Not going to say whether Steve Bruce will be in or out either way and we shouldn’t not to read anything into that. There's been big strides forward and have to wait to see where we are at the end of the season.
Q.
JT and news he wants to stay?
A.
SR – JT has expressed interest he wants to stay on and play.
If promoted, he will most likely be with us - if not, then will have to see where we are.
 

Ps - Cannot provide a link as these comments are taken from the official minutes made available to members .

Interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 24/03/2018 at 02:01, Dave J said:

Whilst I am no huge fan of RDM - I feel I should point out that often on here we can read about the mess Bruce inherited - this being the case then RDM surely inherited utter chaos ?

You're dead right.

But with that mess, RDM performed terribly and had us in 22nd place.

Bruce got an almost immediate upturn in form when he took over, and while it didn't last, it's hard to argue that his performance wasn't better than RDM's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Stevo985 said:

You're dead right.

But with that mess, RDM performed terribly and had us in 22nd place.

Bruce got an almost immediate upturn in form when he took over, and while it didn't last, it's hard to argue that his performance wasn't better than RDM's.

It’s hard to argue that if we never conceded in the last 5/10 min of games we’d have had RDM for a lot longer. I still think we wouldve be been fine under RDM but the weight of expectation from the club was massive so he had to go. Bruce made us more solid but we showed encouraging signs footballing wise under RDM. RDM hadnt never built a broken club so was the wrong choice. Bruce has never built a top club and left a positive legacy but he does get teams promoted by hook or by crook.   Fingers crossed he does it again   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, dn1982 said:

It’s hard to argue that if we never conceded in the last 5/10 min of games we’d have had RDM for a lot longer.

True. But we did.

29 minutes ago, dn1982 said:

 I still think we wouldve be been fine under RDM but the weight of expectation from the club was massive so he had to go. Bruce made us more solid but we showed encouraging signs footballing wise under RDM. RDM hadnt never built a broken club so was the wrong choice. Bruce has never built a top club and left a positive legacy but he does get teams promoted by hook or by crook.   Fingers crossed he does it again   

RDM's other problem was that there was a much better, more experienced and more proven (at this level) manager available at the time of his bad run.

Had there been an absolutely head and shoulders, stand out replacement for Bruce easily available during his worst runs, he may well have got the chop too.

Edited by Stevo985
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 25/03/2018 at 10:40, TRO said:

Dave .....What I mean is no household names......If we had of done and built it that way, we probably wouldn't have done what we did.

They were in the main journey men or players their clubs was not bothered about holding on to......Ron and his coaches built a team to do a job, in the main their Mantra was workrate all built on Industry and workrate, for sure we had players who could play, but it was the work ethic that was our forte.

We had midfielders who could run with the ball and keep it.....We had centre forwards who would win their duels and score goals.....We had inside forwards ( old fashioned term) who had guile......we had a winger who could go past players.....Full Backs who could tackle and raid down the flanks.....and centre halves who could win the ball in the air and add to the goals for column.

I think very few made their mark in the Internationals such was their reputations and none of them caused a stir of excitement ,when we signed them.

thats what I mean Dave.....no famous Names, yet we give some of the best teams in Europe a game.

I guess you will disagree, but Hey ho.

TRO - I am surprised you think I might disagree -  I'm  on your page more than you might care to think. I possibly might think we had a bit more flair than you state  - but otherwise I get where your coming from. Ipswich were not exactly household names either - but for sure they were the press darlings of the time 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Dave J said:

TRO - I am surprised you think I might disagree -  I'm  on your page more than you might care to think. I possibly might think we had a bit more flair than you state  - but otherwise I get where your coming from. Ipswich were not exactly household names either - but for sure they were the press darlings of the time 

 

I am with you on this, Dave. I always thought we were a fast, raiding side, and got support players forward very quickly.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stevo985 said:

True. But we did.

RDM's other problem was that there was a much better, more experienced and more proven (at this level) manager available at the time of his bad run.

Had there been an absolutely head and shoulders, stand out replacement for Bruce easily available during his worst runs, he may well have got the chop too.

Bruce managed expectations last year so the pressure of the bad run after Xmas was deflected when for me it shouldn’t have been. He started badly again this year with a similar start to RDM then hit form beforehand blowing up again in december then just as pressure mounts he hits a run again then when we looked to be challenging top 2 we have another bad run. We need to hit form again soon. It’s written in the stars for Kodija i  reckon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Stevo985 said:

True. But we did.

RDM's other problem was that there was a much better, more experienced and more proven (at this level) manager available at the time of his bad run.

Had there been an absolutely head and shoulders, stand out replacement for Bruce easily available during his worst runs, he may well have got the chop too.

that's an interesting theory - i was always keen on keeping bruce during the bad run partly because i simply couldn't think of a better alternative...i'm not convinced by dean smith and i dont recall hearing many other names mentioned by the folks calling for bruce's head, but had wagner for example found himself unemployed at xmas you may well have been right

I actually had money on Bruce being our manager last summer at decent odds as i heard he would have walked if hull hadn't been promoted and we were waiting in the wings to pounce...apparently was the reason for the delay in announcing RDM which (if i could be bothered to look back through news articles) i believe came shortly after the playoff final

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When we are playing well and he has nothing to do, he is a good manager. When things get tough, he struggles. 

If he sets the team up the right way, it's good. But when that set up stops working he struggles. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â