Steve Bruce

[Vive_La_Villa]

3 minutes ago, Tommo_b said:

So Sherwood signings for most part in hindsight were quite talented and sought after 

Apparently he had no say in it. As I said before the oversees players we bought were all very talented. It was the 2 British clowns at the heart of our defence that ruined us. 

[osmark86]

1 minute ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Apparently he had no say in it. As I said before the oversees players we bought were all very talented. It was the 2 British clowns at the heart of our defence that ruined us. 

Oh the dread to think back to the days of Lescott and Richards at the back.

[Tommo_b]

So paddy O’reilly, good or bad? 

Bruce maybe should hire him back haha. 

[holteend1982]

3 minutes ago, Tommo_b said:

So Sherwood signings for most part in hindsight were quite talented and sought after 

I'd say so but he was also responsible for lescott and Richards potentially two of our worst ever signings.

[sharkyvilla]

Probably the scouting was fine but you need more than that to make it work.  It's why I'm slightly worried about the links to agents providing players that Bruce has never heard of.

[Dave J]

1 hour ago, Adam2003 said:

Conversely, if Bruce hadn’t come in and straightened the kid out he might have still been passing out in ditches in Marbella this summer and on his way to League 2.

I’m fine with people hating Bruce for all sorts of reasons but I’m really convinced on this one that Bruce - and players like Terry who Bruce brought in - saved Grealish’s career. Plenty of players as good as him faded away because they didn’t have good management.

 

We've all been there and eventually we all grow up 

[YLN]

35 minutes ago, Dave J said:

We've all been there and eventually we all grow up 

says Hello

[abdulaziz1]

2 hours ago, Adam2003 said:

Conversely, if Bruce hadn’t come in and straightened the kid out he might have still been passing out in ditches in Marbella this summer and on his way to League 2.

I’m fine with people hating Bruce for all sorts of reasons but I’m really convinced on this one that Bruce - and players like Terry who Bruce brought in - saved Grealish’s career. Plenty of players as good as him faded away because they didn’t have good management.

 

But when you think about the wasted talents then thats a big negative.

Bruce isn’t the worst manager, we’ve had a lot of them who done a much worse job than him.

He is a good person and had some notable things which can’t be forget. But in terms of his job, there are some silly things which has cost us and going to cost us. 

Even some of his signing aren’t getting the chance to play let alone young players.

As a short term solution I don’t mind him. But for him to stay another season if we failed to go up would only harm us. He doesn’t have the ability to build a team. 

[TRO]

2 hours ago, Dave J said:

Your view TRO and you are perfectly entitled to it - even you as one of his staunchest supporters must acknowledge Bruce/tactics don't go hand in glove ? So how would he mould Jack into something different?Jacks time was always coming regardless of who is manager - you could even argue he just grew up !

I think respectfully, you are missing the point Dave.....its difficult to prove one way or the other on Jack.....but equally it should then follow the same uncertainty should be applied when you are castigating him on issues that should attract similar uncertainty.

you criticise him with conviction ......but praise him with reluctance.

its colloquially called " one eyed"

Edited August 4, 2018 by TRO

[Stevo985]

2 hours ago, Adam2003 said:

Conversely, if Bruce hadn’t come in and straightened the kid out he might have still been passing out in ditches in Marbella this summer and on his way to League 2.

I’m fine with people hating Bruce for all sorts of reasons but I’m really convinced on this one that Bruce - and players like Terry who Bruce brought in - saved Grealish’s career. Plenty of players as good as him faded away because they didn’t have good management.

 

Nah just a coincidence. Bruce had nothing to do with it. 

Im sure if Jack had continued to go off the rails then that would have been entirely Bruce’s fault. 

That’s how it works   

[Dave J]

29 minutes ago, TRO said:

I think respectfully, you are missing the point Dave.....its difficult to prove one way or the other on Jack.....but equally it should then follow the same uncertainty should be applied when you are castigating him on issues that should attract similar uncertainty.

you criticise him with conviction ......but praise him with reluctance.

its colloquially called " one eyed"

TRO - you and I will never be far apart in our views but I honestly believe you have this wrong.

i don't rate Bruce - you clearly do and that's ok - however I cannot accept a manager of Bruce's ilk could make any significant difference  to a player of Jack's ability/ temperament - Jack was always going to come good regardless of who is in charge - on what basis could you challenge this?

Jack is a talented player who will probably go on to achieve a lot in the game ( hopefully as a villan ) and the only person who can prevent this is Jack himself - I think  TRO That you and other Bruce fans will try to claim Jack's inevitable rise to his current standing in the game as being down to him as a manager - because he has not met the targets set before him. 

Jack is Jack - he's a maverick and whatever he achieves or not  in the game will be down to him and him alone 

[Stephen_Evans]

What if the position is not black and white and is a little more nuanced? My take:

1. He seems to be a good man-manager, giving confidence to a lad (Grealish) with bundles of natural talent.

2. He seems to inspire loyalty from good professionals like Chester, Hutton and Terry (for example).  There are some players he falls out with, probably like every other manager who has ever lived.

3. He’s pragmatic, has a broad idea of how he wants his team to play and trusts players to do the job for him.  His approach is competent and a valid way to play the game, but there are other ways that are more exciting and effective.

4. He sets his team up in a way tactically (eg containing, counter attacking, using width, but lack of pass and move and lack of sustained pressing) which means that we tend to owe everything to the individuals in the team - relying on them doing something great or conversely not doing something stupid.

5. Bruce isn’t a duffer but he isn’t Pepe.  He will always hit his head on an glass ceiling eventually.  There are good points, but often “good” is the enemy of the “best”.  My sense is that the thinking, intelligent supporter who would like Bruce to move on is someone who thinks the glass ceiling is below the goal we are trying to achieve (2017/18 being a case in point).

[Vive_La_Villa]

4 minutes ago, Dave J said:

TRO - you and I will never be far apart in our views but I honestly believe you have this wrong.

i don't rate Bruce - you clearly do and that's ok - however I cannot accept a manager of Bruce's ilk could make any significant difference  to a player of Jack's ability/ temperament - Jack was always going to come good regardless of who is in charge - on what basis could you challenge this?

Jack is a talented player who will probably go on to achieve a lot in the game ( hopefully as a villan ) and the only person who can prevent this is Jack himself - I think  TRO That you and other Bruce fans will try to claim Jack's inevitable rise to his current standing in the game as being down to him as a manager - because he has not met the targets set before him. 

Jack is Jack - he's a maverick and whatever he achieves or not  in the game will be down to him and him alone 

Somebody has definitely coached him to speed his game up. He no longer slows the game down so much and looks to drive forward from deeper positions a lot more. 

[Dave J]

1 minute ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Somebody has definitely coached him to speed his game up. He no longer slows the game down so much and looks to drive forward from deeper positions a lot more. 

He's playing in the championship - you need to factor this in 

[Vive_La_Villa]

Just now, Dave J said:

He's playing in the championship - you need to factor this in 

True but you have to remember he was also in the championship 2 years ago and was guilty of slowly our attack’s down then too. I actually thought we were better off selling him. 

He was a different player last season.  

[Dave J]

15 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

True but you have to remember he was also in the championship 2 years ago and was guilty of slowly our attack’s down then too. I actually thought we were better off selling him. 

He was a different player last season.  

Yes and Bruce was his manager for the majority of this  1st season you refer to  ? 

[Vive_La_Villa]

6 minutes ago, Dave J said:

Yes and Bruce was his manager for the majority of this  1st season you refer to  ? 

He was. I’m not trying to defend Bruce. I was pointing out his game had changed and I think it’s beem down to coaching. Not just down to Jack. 

Probably one for the Grealish theead.

[weedman]

1 hour ago, Dave J said:

Yes and Bruce was his manager for the majority of this  1st season you refer to  ? 

Its almost like it takes a bit of time to coach someone into changing their natural way of playing or something isn't it? A little time to get fitter and stronger to suit that new way of playing? It's a head scratcher, for sure 

[srsmithusa]

I think Jack gets credit.  Bruce gets credit.   John Terry gets credit.  Maturity gets credit.   The serious injury gets credit.  The championship gets credit.  Loyal fans get credit.  Impossible to sort out what percent credit should be attributed to each.  (Although my guess is that the order I listed is highest to lowest, since we’re all just guessing.).  I would also guess that my list is missing someone important. Agnew, jacks brother, jacks dad, some girl, some other coach.....   if only Jack would tell us and give us the exact percentages, we could tell him where is is wrong.  

 

 

 

[Lerner's Driver]

7 hours ago, Stephen_Evans said:

What if the position is not black and white and is a little more nuanced? My take:

1. He seems to be a good man-manager, giving confidence to a lad (Grealish) with bundles of natural talent.

2. He seems to inspire loyalty from good professionals like Chester, Hutton and Terry (for example).  There are some players he falls out with, probably like every other manager who has ever lived.

3. He’s pragmatic, has a broad idea of how he wants his team to play and trusts players to do the job for him.  His approach is competent and a valid way to play the game, but there are other ways that are more exciting and effective.

4. He sets his team up in a way tactically (eg containing, counter attacking, using width, but lack of pass and move and lack of sustained pressing) which means that we tend to owe everything to the individuals in the team - relying on them doing something great or conversely not doing something stupid.

5. Bruce isn’t a duffer but he isn’t Pepe.  He will always hit his head on an glass ceiling eventually.  There are good points, but often “good” is the enemy of the “best”.  My sense is that the thinking, intelligent supporter who would like Bruce to move on is someone who thinks the glass ceiling is below the goal we are trying to achieve (2017/18 being a case in point).

An excellent post, but you will have lost most with the first sentence. Nuance is the enemy of the people.