Steve Bruce

[Stevo985]

2 hours 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. 

We've been round this before.

You're right, you can't compare them exactly and say Bruce is better than Manager X because his win percentage is 5% higher.

But you CAN use win percentage to give a general idea that a manager has done well. 

You can't argue, for example, that Garde was a better Villa manager than Bruce given garde's win % was 13% and Bruce's is whatever it is, 44%?

It's an indicator, but certainly not an exact measure.

 

I don't agree, for example, that you can label Bruce one of our worst managers ever when he has a win percentage of 44% over 100 games.
I completely agree that he hasn't been good ENOUGH. 100%

But as usual I think VT is exaggerating a Manager's deficiencies because he's out of favour.

Edited September 27, 2018 by Stevo985

[Thug]

I suppose they want to secure a replacement before they boot him.

 

there can be no other explanation.

[Vive_La_Villa]

1 minute ago, Stevo985 said:

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.

Fair enough. Impossible to ever know if he would be better but I do think I had seen enough to be confident he would have finished around the same place as Bruce and there is no way we would have got us relegated.

Appreciate form up to his sacking doesn’t suggest that and the change had to be made. 

[JamesBCFC]

Genuine question(s).

1. Are any if you at the point where you'd want Villa to lose games to see Bruce go?

In 2016-17 there was a member of our forum who started a "I hope we lose" thread ahead of our FA Cup game against Fleetwood. On the basis that defeat would have brought Lee Johnson closer to the sack (this was in our long bad run that season).

Despite quite a few people at that time being "LJ out" he was, almost entirely, slated for his comment.

 

2. Would you take 3 defeats in your next 3 games- essentially ruling out promotion for this season- if it meant Bruce left.

 

Edited September 27, 2018 by JamesBCFC

[Taxahunter]

2 minutes ago, JamesBCFC said:

Genuine question.

Are any if you at the point where you'd want Villa to lose games to see Bruce go?

In 2016-17 there was a member of our forum who started a "I hope we lose" thread ahead of our FA Cup game against Fleetwood. On the basis that defeat would have brought Lee Johnson closer to the sack (this was in our long bad run that season).

Despite quite a few people at that time being "LJ out" he was, almost entirely, slated for his comment.

Yes, I am. I'm stuck between 2 chairs as I hate to see Villa loose, but I just want him to disappear.

Edited September 27, 2018 by Taxahunter

[Vive_La_Villa]

1 minute ago, JamesBCFC said:

Genuine question.

Are any if you at the point where you'd want Villa to lose games to see Bruce go?

In 2016-17 there was a member of our forum who started a "I hope we lose" thread ahead of our FA Cup game against Fleetwood. On the basis that defeat would have brought Lee Johnson closer to the sack (this was in our long bad run that season).

Despite quite a few people at that time being "LJ out" he was, almost entirely, slated for his comment.

It’s been asked and yes people do want us to lose if it means a change.

For me I still want us to win but In an unconvincing manner so he is still sacked. 

[Thug]

2 minutes ago, JamesBCFC said:

Genuine question.

Are any if you at the point where you'd want Villa to lose games to see Bruce go?

In 2016-17 there was a member of our forum who started a "I hope we lose" thread ahead of our FA Cup game against Fleetwood. On the basis that defeat would have brought Lee Johnson closer to the sack (this was in our long bad run that season).

Despite quite a few people at that time being "LJ out" he was, almost entirely, slated for his comment.

To be honest, I’m always happy when we win.

 

but, it’s like having a bet on us losing... it takes the pain of the loss away.  I end up thinking ‘oh well, at least he might get sacked now...’

 

 

[sne]

2 minutes ago, JamesBCFC said:

Genuine question(s).

1. Are any if you at the point where you'd want Villa to lose games to see Bruce go?

In 2016-17 there was a member of our forum who started a "I hope we lose" thread ahead of our FA Cup game against Fleetwood. On the basis that defeat would have brought Lee Johnson closer to the sack (this was in our long bad run that season).

Despite quite a few people at that time being "LJ out" he was, almost entirely, slated for his comment.

 

2. Would you take 3 defeats in your next 3 games- essentially ruling out promotion for this season- if it meant Bruce left.

 

I want our owners to see that Bruce needs to be replaced regardless if we win lose or draw the next 3 games.

Fwiw I don't think 3 losses at this point of the season would rule us out of promotion. Will still be 34 games and 102 points to play for.

Plenty of time still.

[JamesBCFC]

2 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

It’s been asked and yes people do want us to lose if it means a change.

For me I still want us to win but In an unconvincing manner so he is still sacked. 

Didn't realise it's been asked, threads moved on about 300 pages since I last checked it.

[HeyAnty]

5 minutes ago, Thug said:

I suppose they want to secure a replacement before they boot him.

 

there can be no other explanation.

Yes, ive said that all along. 

Purslow has got form in this.  It took him nearly 3 weeks to get Benitez's replacement in, whilst Benitez didnt know anything about it.  One of the main reasons Liverpool fans never liked him.

[Vive_La_Villa]

1 minute ago, JamesBCFC said:

Didn't realise it's been asked, threads moved on about 300 pages since I last checked it.

It will move another 300 pages when you next check

[JamesBCFC]

Just now, sne said:

I want our owners to see that Bruce needs to be replaced regardless if we win lose or draw the next 3 games.

Fwiw I don't think 3 losses at this point of the season would rule us out of promotion. Will still be 34 games and 102 points to play for.

Plenty of time still.

You are right it wouldn't, but it would leave promotion very unlikely and would need a dramatic turnaround.

Would be 13 points from the first 12 and (saying 90 for promotion) would then need 78 points from 34, exactly 2 points per game until the end

[Vive_La_Villa]

1 minute ago, HeyAnty said:

Yes, ive said that all along. 

Purslow has got form in this.  It took him nearly 3 weeks to get Benitez's replacement in, whilst Benitez didnt know anything about it.  One of the main reasons Liverpool fans never liked him.

3 weeks to get Hodgson in? What an anti climax for Liverpool fans.

[HeyAnty]

1 minute ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

3 weeks to get Hodgson in? What an anti climax for Liverpool fans.

Na not really, they didnt know anything about it nor did Benitez.  Talks were going on for 3 weeks behind Benitez's back.

[sheepyvillian]

I always want us to win, no matter the manager . As happy as it makes me to see us win, I'd be as equally happy to see this manager depart before we're left languishing for yet another season in the championship .

[Zatman]

1 hour 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.

 

probably includes his backroom staff

[Junxs]

I'm not saying RDM was good, but it annoys me when people don't take into consideration that we had to play 6 teams that ended the season in the top 10, 2 of which got promoted and one which lost the play off final. To only have 2 defeats in that time wasn't so bad in hindsight. There is certainly no evidence he would have got us relegated when you consider this. Wasn't half as bad as Bruces run after Xmas. 

Watching the games at least he had a plan of playing football, it was last minute equalisers that cost him the job ultimately. 

[HeyAnty]

12 minutes ago, Junxs said:

I'm not saying RDM was good, but it annoys me when people don't take into consideration that we had to play 6 teams that ended the season in the top 10, 2 of which got promoted and one which lost the play off final. To only have 2 defeats in that time wasn't so bad in hindsight. There is certainly no evidence he would have got us relegated when you consider this. Wasn't half as bad as Bruces run after Xmas. 

Watching the games at least he had a plan of playing football, it was last minute equalisers that cost him the job ultimately. 

My point exactly, only you put it alot better.

[TRO]

3 hours 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. 

but surely that is the point of win ratios.

Lets divorce Steve Bruce from the debate for a second.

A manager in a lower division has a harder time attracting better players, than the higher leagues, so its most likely he has players commensurate with that division, which balances things out.

If a manager is fortunate enough to have better players like Wolves did last season and untold wealth and a brilliant agent to boot, bully for them.....The managers win ratio is still valid IMO.....He still has to blend and motivate them.

Wealth and good players, all aid the ability to win games, but there are many other factors too....you cannot account for them all.

Win Ratios are not the be all an end all....but In my opinion they are a decent Barometer of the managers ability.....don't be blinded by too many conditions/factors, they even themselves out.

Usually, the better division you are in the better equipped players you have to deal with it.

We have gone down to 13th place, so Steve Bruce's win ratio will have deteriorated....that's fair IMO......If he gets us promoted ( which I very much doubt) he will have better players due to investment, to deal with a better league....that's fair too.

Many statisticians use them, if they thought they were unfair of  lacked credibility they wouldn't pursue them.

The best managers around all have the best win ratios, funny that.....and conversely the worst ones always preside over poor win ratios...funny that too.

League placings are also good measurement as we all know.

Edited September 27, 2018 by TRO

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

1 hour ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

It’s been asked and yes people do want us to lose if it means a change.

For me I still want us to win but In an unconvincing manner so he is still sacked. 

Best scenario, typically shit performance with a last minute wonder strike winner.