Steve Bruce

[El Zen]

I’m honestly surprised he’s still here. It’s quite deflating. 

[wilko154]

1 hour ago, theboyangel said:

Bruce undoubtedly has a fairly decent points ratio for us and arguably much better than our other more recent incumbents Lambert, Garde, Sherwood and RDM

Even though he is considerably better than those guys, he is still a dreadful tactician who spews out a mind-numbing brand of football. 

Just goes to show, those who have been in charge of the club have done a shocking job of employing the right staff to take care of team affairs...

Bruce needs replacing for sure but can we have faith in the club to finally employ someone worthy of the position?

Unfortunately the statistics don't tell the whole story. Bruce has been in charge of a squad that is comparatively better than the majority of the division, other recent managers have been in charge of squads that were comparatively worse than the majority (if not all) of the division).

Bruce has the highest win ratio - 43.75% since Graham Taylor in 1987-1990 (I'm not entirely sure how up to date these statistics are... but they are there or thereabouts )

Recent managers win ratio's:

Di Matteo - 8.33%

Garde - 13.04%

Sherwood - 35.7%

Lambert - 29.57%

McLeish - 21.43%

Houllier - 35.9%

O'Neill - 42.11%

 

It has to be argued that with the trajectory of wins that Houllier and Sherwood were accumulating before they were cut short, they were the better managers of recent times as both sides they inherited were not of a high Premier League standard. 

However as we found out with the 2015/16 squad we assembled, statistics can be very misleading.

 

[hippo]

5 minutes ago, wilko154 said:

Unfortunately the statistics don't tell the whole story. Bruce has been in charge of a squad that is comparatively better than the majority of the division, other recent managers have been in charge of squads that were comparatively worse than the majority (if not all) of the division).

Bruce has the highest win ratio - 43.75% since Graham Taylor in 1987-1990 (I'm not entirely sure how up to date these statistics are... but they are there or thereabouts )

Recent managers win ratio's:

Di Matteo - 8.33%

Garde - 13.04%

Sherwood - 35.7%

Lambert - 29.57%

McLeish - 21.43%

Houllier - 35.9%

O'Neill - 42.11%

 

It has to be argued that with the trajectory of wins that Houllier and Sherwood were accumulating before they were cut short, they were the better managers of recent times as both sides they inherited were not of a high Premier League standard. 

However as we found out with the 2015/16 squad we assembled, statistics can be very misleading.

 

Looking at that - jesus we recruited some turkeys - the top 3 in particular looked poor appointments from day 1.

[sne]

Bruce also has a slightly better loss % compared to RDM

31% vs 33% games lost

Where RDM really shines is games drawn, almost 60% of his games ended in a stalemate. 3 point system not his friend.

Anyway, both failures and time to move on.

[HeyAnty]

I've a feeling when our owners do pull the plug they wont take a gamble on a new manger.  It will be someone who is well known and of high caliber.   

I have heard Claudio Ranieri's name mentioned, no ITK or anything before people jump on me.  Not sure if i would want him though.

[Zatman]

10 hours ago, MrDuck said:

This. Tried to completely change a very good side overnight that just needed tweaking. Awful appointment in every way.

Why we have be careful who we appoint. If bring in a new style we have to be patient especially if appoint in mid-season

Houllier at Anfield is one of most disgusting things ever by any Aston Villa employee

[Made In Aston]

1 hour ago, wilko154 said:

Unfortunately the statistics don't tell the whole story. Bruce has been in charge of a squad that is comparatively better than the majority of the division, other recent managers have been in charge of squads that were comparatively worse than the majority (if not all) of the division).

Bruce has the highest win ratio - 43.75% since Graham Taylor in 1987-1990 (I'm not entirely sure how up to date these statistics are... but they are there or thereabouts )

Recent managers win ratio's:

Di Matteo - 8.33%

Garde - 13.04%

Sherwood - 35.7%

Lambert - 29.57%

McLeish - 21.43%

Houllier - 35.9%

O'Neill - 42.11%

 

It has to be argued that with the trajectory of wins that Houllier and Sherwood were accumulating before they were cut short, they were the better managers of recent times as both sides they inherited were not of a high Premier League standard. 

However as we found out with the 2015/16 squad we assembled, statistics can be very misleading.

 

Comparing Bruce's win % to these managers is not accurate as villa were a bottom half team in the Premier league for most of that time. As villa are effectively the man utd/chelsea/Liverpool of the championship win ratios should be compared with the managers of these clubs rather than old villa bosses. Doing this shows that Bruce's record in the championship is mediocre. 

[wilko154]

5 minutes ago, Made In Aston said:

Comparing Bruce's win % to these managers is not accurate as villa were a bottom half team in the Premier league for most of that time. As villa are effectively the man utd/chelsea/Liverpool of the championship win ratios should be compared with the managers of these clubs rather than old villa bosses. Doing this shows that Bruce's record in the championship is mediocre. 

Pretty much my point there...

[Vive_La_Villa]

3 hours ago, Stevo985 said:

Would they? 

That's a big assumption.

If Bruce gets sacked this weekend and we get a new manager who manages to get us winning games I could say "Well those wins would have come under Bruce eventually"

RDM was struggling.

He was struggling but my assumption is based on what I had seen up to him being sacked.  There is no way we should have only won one game. We had the most chances created  of any team in the league.

Eventually the goals would have starting coming imo.

[Vive_La_Villa]

3 hours ago, Stevo985 said:

People are actually arguing that RDM was better than Bruce

This place is mental

 

Nobody has even said that. 

 

3 hours ago, bannedfromHandV said:

Based on 'he's not Bruce'. 

Let's just call a spade a spade and stop tiptoeing around it all. 

Fortunately history rights itself over time and once the anger fades away SB will be regarded much more highly in the annals of history than he is right now. 

As I said in my previous post it was based on what I had seen up to his sacking and my opinion. It’s got nothing to do with Bruce.

[AntrimBlack]

2 hours ago, bannedfromHandV said:

Based on 'he's not Bruce'. 

Let's just call a spade a spade and stop tiptoeing around it all. 

Fortunately history rights itself over time and once the anger fades away SB will be regarded much more highly in the annals of history than he is right now. 

No he won't. If anything the opposite will happen.

[rubberman]

Bruce is an 18 month manager.

First 6 months he solidified us.  That's a plus.  Arguably could have got more out of the side after Jan additions.

Last season - added short term quality.  Got close, but ultimately failed, and even had we gone up we'd be getting thumped now with either a below PL standard squad or complete rebuild.  Should have gone in the summer if it wasn't for the off-field clusterf*ck.

This season - a lower quality repeat version of last.  No building on where we were, no progression, just try again with new players, with many of the last lot he bought jettisoned as if they were the problem.

I can see why, given the summers financial issues and late takeover, he was retained, though by all accounts he was asked to make us more sustainable long term and attractive.  Outside his comfort zone this is clearly failing.  He is a one trick pony and that pony looks like it ready for the knacker's yard.  Even if we have another winning streak, get back up challenging etc - we've got nothing long term in place. 

I can only assume and hope we'll have a DoF in place in the next couple of weeks and new manager during the next international break.  We have enough quality in a pretty crap league to still pull off promotion with a proper visionary manager from here but can't afford to slip back much further.  Time's up - let's move forward.

[sne]

If his buddies in the media are right and it will cost us £3m to sack him it will mean he would have cost us £9m in wages for his services if we get rid now. (2 years + 1 year pay off)

Now I don't believe these figures as before this talk of pay off became a thing all reports said he was on half that, as in £1.5m/year.

 

[fifamad]

2 hours ago, Michelsen said:

I’m honestly surprised he’s still here. It’s quite deflating. 

He ain’t going anywhere 

[bannedfromHandV]

30 minutes ago, AntrimBlack said:

No he won't. If anything the opposite will happen.

Okay cool, let's reconvene in 10 years or so.

I'm confident he will be seen as the person who steadied the ship before the expansion.

[HeyAnty]

24 minutes ago, sne said:

If his buddies in the media are right and it will cost us £3m to sack him it will mean he would have cost us £9m in wages for his services if we get rid now. (2 years + 1 year pay off)

Now I don't believe these figures as before this talk of pay off became a thing all reports said he was on half that, as in £1.5m/year.

 

I thought he was on a 1 year rolling contract?

[sne]

14 minutes ago, HeyAnty said:

I thought he was on a 1 year rolling contract?

He is, been here 2 years and will get 1 year pay off.

Edit: Just to add how absurd it would be if we are actually paying him £3m / season, only 7 managers in the PL were payed more than that last season.

I refuse to believe he's on £3m or that it would cost us that much to sack him.

Edited September 27, 2018 by sne

[HeyAnty]

Just now, sne said:

He is, been here 2 years and will get 1 year pay off.

 

Ah okay, read it wrong.  Thought we would have to pay 9mill to get rid.  Even if it was that it would be money well spent.

[Mantis]

Can't believe he's still here. Thought he'd be gone after the Wednesday game.

[Stevo985]

56 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Nobody has even said that. 

 

Yeah my bad, I phrased that badly.

I should have probably said people are arguing that RDM would have been better than Bruce. Which is different but I think still has similar limits to the argument.