Steve Bruce

[bannedfromHandV]

Is there any end to this conversation?

 

Some people don't like Bruce and want him sacked

Some people do like Bruce and want him to be given time

Some people are somewhere in between those two points of view

 

No amount of debating will move anyone from the category they're already in so how about we just try to enjoy the last two games of the season and see what happens between then and August?

[tomav84]

2 hours ago, TRO said:

Every now and again, we get a post like this......very sensible reasoning.

quick, close the thread!

[mykeyb]

2 hours ago, TRO said:

I still have a concern that some think there is a manager out there that can flick a switch.

Rafa had a far different canvas to work with than SB......Their final season in the Prem was a struggle as was a complete catastrophe.

I certainly dont think there is a manager out there who will guarantee a top 2 finish, far from it. I am not saying that Bruce wont achieve promotion either. What concerns me massively is the lack of progress on the pitch, the lack of any improvement in any of our players under his coaching staff. The complete lack of attacking threat, no movement, poor passing and being pretty weak in defence when they dont have the protection of Jedinak in front of them. I dont buy that he is concentrating on making us hard to beat as we were anything but in January & February and the number one key failure for me a complete lack of system or identity on the pitch. I look at those points and really struggle to make a case for Bruce being the success I hoped he would be. I have serious doubts that in 12 months time we will be celebrating like Brighton and Newcastle fans have in the last 7 days.

Time is the only thing that will dictate if my concerns were justified or if other like TRO  were right to say he needs more time. I genuinely hope I havent got the measure of the man as I dont want us battling down here any longer than any other fan.

[srsmithusa]

14 hours ago, KSV said:

Im not a massive fan or Bruce as a manager or our style of play. I think our players can play alot better under a good manager. The problem is are they willing to come now? If not.. why get rid of Bruce? If we can only bring another so so manager. If we can get Rafa or someone.. then sure.. bring him in but that sort of calibre manager won't want to come now. 

We need stability.. Bruce is a decent enough manager who knows how to get out of the division. He seems like a likeable manager for the players.. they seem to be fighting for him and he has created a very good team spirit in the squad with the players he's bought in. This is a massive thing that gets overlooked. I haven't seen a group like the current lot who enjoy each other's company and have a decent relationship with the fans in a long while. We also have not had a manager with multiple transfer windows to build a squad they want. If we bring another manager.. we may have to have a turn over of players and start again.

I think Bruce knows the problems and limitations of the squad. I think he will be after a defender.. keeper and a midfielder and striker who know how to look after the ball. He knows we don't keep possession well.

The squad is close and I think a bit more tinkering.. he can get us over the line. I expect more from Lansbury and Hourihane after an off season too.  As both haven't performed as well as they have at their previous clubs.

I fully expect a top 2 finish next season.

very reasonable post, but I was amused by the highlighted bit.

You see what I see and interpret it as a positive hope for the future and once they start playing as well as they clearly can, it will be great.  While I actually agree with that statement, I see it as missing the prequel.  They can clearly play better.  What the $%&*% is wrong, that their not?  Surely Bruce must have something to do with the answer to that question.

While being new in a team with quite a few new players, can be a challenge, there has got to be more to their decreased performances.  There are lots of transfers every season.  Not all players spend the next half season far below their previous level of performance.  Some actually come in and light a spark and improve at their new club.  That has happened to no new signing at AVFC for a long time..... to my recollection.  Certainly none in January. 

I just looked up Gueye on wikipedia  "Gueye became the first player in Europe's top five leagues to win 100 tackles in the 2016–17 season"  didn't seem to take him THAT long to settle in....

Pulled up another name at random from the league transfer list.  Gabriel Jesus.  Arrived at the club in January.  "On 1 February he made his first Premier League start in place of Sergio Agüero, and assisted Kevin De Bruyne in the 17th minute and then scored his first goal for the club in the 39th. With this, he became the first Manchester City player to have a goal and an assist in their first Premier League start, as well as only the third City player to be involved in two or more goals in their first Premier League start." Granted he then got injured. and missed a long spell.

My point is, starting at a new club is challenging and there are some adjustments that may take some time.  But it's not like it's a universal rule that all new signings must perform far below previous standards for months on end.   It's the norm here, to be sure.  The question in my mind is.... why is it the norm here.  It's fine for it to happen to some.  It's fine for it to take a few matches to settle.  But for virtually every new signing to take a half season or more?  Something just doesn't smell right.

[KSV]

2 minutes ago, srsmithusa said:

very reasonable post, but I was amused by the highlighted bit.

You see what I see and interpret it as a positive hope for the future and once they start playing as well as they clearly can, it will be great.  While I actually agree with that statement, I see it as missing the prequel.  They can clearly play better.  What the $%&*% is wrong, that their not?  Surely Bruce must have something to do with the answer to that question.

While being new in a team with quite a few new players, can be a challenge, there has got to be more to their decreased performances.  There are lots of transfers every season.  Not all players spend the next half season far below their previous level of performance.  Some actually come in and light a spark and improve at their new club.  That has happened to no new signing at AVFC for a long time..... to my recollection.  Certainly none in January. 

I just looked up Gueye on wikipedia  "Gueye became the first player in Europe's top five leagues to win 100 tackles in the 2016–17 season"  didn't seem to take him THAT long to settle in....

Pulled up another name at random from the league transfer list.  Gabriel Jesus.  Arrived at the club in January.  "On 1 February he made his first Premier League start in place of Sergio Agüero, and assisted Kevin De Bruyne in the 17th minute and then scored his first goal for the club in the 39th. With this, he became the first Manchester City player to have a goal and an assist in their first Premier League start, as well as only the third City player to be involved in two or more goals in their first Premier League start." Granted he then got injured. and missed a long spell.

My point is, starting at a new club is challenging and there are some adjustments that may take some time.  But it's not like it's a universal rule that all new signings must perform far below previous standards for months on end.   It's the norm here, to be sure.  The question in my mind is.... why is it the norm here.  It's fine for it to happen to some.  It's fine for it to take a few matches to settle.  But for virtually every new signing to take a half season or more?  Something just doesn't smell right.

I think playing for Villa the last few years is quite unique. Clearly the side was down on confidence.. going through quite a few turnaround of players etc.. it just makes it harder to fit into a style of play or team. Where as Aguero etc.. just slot into a ready made.. confident side with a certain style of play. 

[srsmithusa]

14 minutes ago, KSV said:

I think playing for Villa the last few years is quite unique. Clearly the side was down on confidence.. going through quite a few turnaround of players etc.. it just makes it harder to fit into a style of play or team. Where as Aguero etc.. just slot into a ready made.. confident side with a certain style of play. 

Agreed, but I think there is still more to it.  New managers often bring in new systems and new signings.  Some players struggle with that adjustment, but not all.  Just looking at the two illustrations I used.   (I literally pulled them at random from the list of 2016/2017 transfers.)  Gueye went into a new team with a new manager.  Jesus went in to a new team with a first season manager.  Plenty do it and thrive.  I fear we are too quick to blame the new team adjustments for too much.  I will happily agree it is a factor.  I just don't think it's as big a factor as many others apparently do.

 

[DoubtGin]

Quote

“I’d like two, three or four real bits of quality – lads who will make a huge difference. I think this is what this club demands.

 

:|

Edited April 28, 2017 by DoubtGin

[Godders]

24 minutes ago, DoubtGin said:

 

:|

As expected then by the sounds of it, a handful in and a good chunk out.

[dont_do_it_doug.]

Steve Bruce Interview

I'm paraphrasing massively but when talking about the derby game he says - "I've watched it twice now and oof. I only got to half time the second time around before thinking I've seen enough of this crap!"

He's aware of the issues. Painfully. So the concern should not be the he wants us to play this way. 

[srsmithusa]

21 minutes ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

Steve Bruce Interview

I'm paraphrasing massively but when talking about the derby game he says - "I've watched it twice now and oof. I only got to half time the second time around before thinking I've seen enough of this crap!"

He's aware of the issues. Painfully. So the concern should not be the he wants us to play this way. 

Good.  I can move on to worrying about his aptitude or method for fixing it.

[villakram]

What a huge surprise. The only way this man knows how to improve a team is by adding a quality player... PFM 101! 

[dont_do_it_doug.]

4 minutes ago, villakram said:

What a huge surprise. The only way this man knows how to improve a team is by adding a quality player... PFM 101! 

So basically no matter what he says, you're going to bring a negative response? 

[villakram]

Just now, dont_do_it_doug. said:

So basically no matter what he says, you're going to bring a negative response? 

No, I'm not exactly providing the most biting of critiques or anything. It's just that since he started managing Bruce has always appealed to the "extra body" or "bit of quality" to advance the team. But he has demonstrated little progress with what he has.

Similarly, it's all well and good talking to the media and identifying problems, likewise with his post game talk, but I see scant evidence that he, the manager afterall, has done anything that has demonstrably rectified these issues. Evidence of improvements will lead to changes of opinion. Not much to play with after 3/4 of a season. Bruce is a great talker, living off his reputation.

[skarroki]

Bruce is a PR dream. He says exactly what the PR team want to send out to the fans to keep them quiet and off the clubs back. I was happy that he was seeing what we were seeing in October/November/December and it needed changing. 

It's May on Monday. Do something about it, tell us what you're trying to do about it or shut up about it and admit you're clueless about how to fix it or have no intention of trying to improve the style of play. 

 

I like Bruce's record in the championship. I think he comes across well. But I can't stand a broken record and he's been skipping since he stepped in the door. 

[TRO]

5 hours ago, mykeyb said:

I certainly dont think there is a manager out there who will guarantee a top 2 finish, far from it. I am not saying that Bruce wont achieve promotion either. What concerns me massively is the lack of progress on the pitch, the lack of any improvement in any of our players under his coaching staff. The complete lack of attacking threat, no movement, poor passing and being pretty weak in defence when they dont have the protection of Jedinak in front of them. I dont buy that he is concentrating on making us hard to beat as we were anything but in January & February and the number one key failure for me a complete lack of system or identity on the pitch. I look at those points and really struggle to make a case for Bruce being the success I hoped he would be. I have serious doubts that in 12 months time we will be celebrating like Brighton and Newcastle fans have in the last 7 days.

Time is the only thing that will dictate if my concerns were justified or if other like TRO  were right to say he needs more time. I genuinely hope I havent got the measure of the man as I dont want us battling down here any longer than any other fan.

When you analyse all that down the difference between my argument and yours is TIME to do the job.

All of that, I see too at present.

[TRO]

3 hours ago, villakram said:

No, I'm not exactly providing the most biting of critiques or anything. It's just that since he started managing Bruce has always appealed to the "extra body" or "bit of quality" to advance the team. But he has demonstrated little progress with what he has.

Similarly, it's all well and good talking to the media and identifying problems, likewise with his post game talk, but I see scant evidence that he, the manager afterall, has done anything that has demonstrably rectified these issues. Evidence of improvements will lead to changes of opinion. Not much to play with after 3/4 of a season. Bruce is a great talker, living off his reputation.

So the managers old adage......" you're only as good as your players"...... is a red herring?

funny how the best managers, have the best players.

[Godders]

3 hours ago, skarroki said:

Do something about it, tell us what you're trying to do about it

He's literally just said, again, he's looking to add a bit more quality to the team.

Seems to me like he's been telling you for a few weeks now what he's going to do about it.

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

4 hours ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

So basically no matter what he says, you're going to bring a negative response? 

He needs to sign shit players to prove his pedigree as a manager!

 

[dont_do_it_doug.]

32 minutes ago, Godders said:

He's literally just said, again, he's looking to add a bit more quality to the team.

Seems to me like he's been telling you for a few weeks now what he's going to do about it.

He's also been relatively up front about the performances. It's hardly "we go again" and he is contractually obliged to take interviews. 

I'm at a loss as to explain where the rant that you're responding to is coming from. 

[DaveAV1]

2 hours ago, TRO said:

So the managers old adage......" you're only as good as your players"...... is a red herring?

funny how the best managers, have the best players.

They look like the best players because they function as a team and their manager gets the best out of them. If finance has anything to do with it, we should already have most of the best players.