Steve Bruce

[pacbuddies]

Some people on here have a desire to see a manager that can get us playing a good style of football. What's wrong with that aspiration? Then someone else comes along and says "who" as if it's a crime or sin to even harbour such thoughts. It is not for the humble fan to decide who it should be as AVFC employ people on enormous salaries to do that job. Stop with the smart Alec replies and just accept that not everyone is prepared to accept dross like some obviously are.

[AJ]

27 minutes ago, pacbuddies said:

Some people on here have a desire to see a manager that can get us playing a good style of football. What's wrong with that aspiration? Then someone else comes along and says "who" as if it's a crime or sin to even harbour such thoughts. It is not for the humble fan to decide who it should be as AVFC employ people on enormous salaries to do that job. Stop with the smart Alec replies and just accept that not everyone is prepared to accept dross like some obviously are.

That is the big question though. I am not happy with Steve Bruce, but if he was to be replaced, it has to be for the sake of  a manager getting the best out of the players, and not having to settle for somebody because all of a sudden we have a vacancy that needs to be filled.

It is a concern were we to take our chances on hoping that we get a good quality manager, that none would find the job of managing Villa appealing. We are now a mid table Championship club. We have had 6 years of bad history with managers. I doubt we look as appealing to work with anymore.

You are correct, there is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting a manager who can get us playing good football. Everyone who loves this club would want that. However, the question of "who" is an important one. The correct answer gets us at least to the play offs. The wrong answer cements our position in the Championship. Or worse.

[striker]

6 hours ago, TRO said:

I think when the summer transfer window opens,a few more answers to our speculative questions ,will be answered.

Despite January's dip, i think he now realises he had weaknesses, he was at first dubious of.....now he knows....those weaknesses have effected the balance of the team.

summer will reveal all.

we will be in the shake up at the end of the season.....but it won't be this team.

Do you think there is a reason why Bruce has set up so defensively this season in that he is trying to put a sticking plaster over the weaknesses in the team until the summer even though the last few games presented a chance to introduce a more offensive style of play?

I ask this because your above post suggests that there will be a dramatic change in the balance of the team with yet more new players coming in and a distinct improvement in results next season.

My point is that all of the above considered if Villa continue to play so defensively next season despite more new players coming in (style of play didn't change when signing Lansbury, Hourihane and Hogan) then how are style of play and results going to improve?

[Stevo985]

1 hour ago, pacbuddies said:

Some people on here have a desire to see a manager that can get us playing a good style of football. What's wrong with that aspiration? Then someone else comes along and says "who" as if it's a crime or sin to even harbour such thoughts. It is not for the humble fan to decide who it should be as AVFC employ people on enormous salaries to do that job. Stop with the smart Alec replies and just accept that not everyone is prepared to accept dross like some obviously are.

Why is it so bad to question who that manager could be?

If I said I'd like us to employ a manager who will win every game and win us the Champions League in three seasons, then I'd rightly be questioned as to who on earth is capable of that.

 

We'd all like to see so called good football, but the priority for all fans should be promotion, regardless of the football. Now if we sacked bruce (which we won't) and we could replace him with a manager who plays "good" football AND gets us promoted, then that would obviously be everybody's first choice.
But if you're calling for the current manager, a manager who many consider good enough to get us promoted, to be sacked and replaced with a manager who can play "a good style of football" then you're rightly questioned as to who that is, as doing so would be seen as a gamble by a lot of people.

Hiding behind the line that it's not your job to find a manager, it's the club's job, is a cop out. If we couldn't be asked on things that are the "club's job" then we wouldn't be able to discuss managers, signings, contracts etc etc as they are all "the club's job".

[Stevo985]

12 hours ago, DCJonah said:

I hope the decision to make a public statement about having to finish top 10 was due to pressure from above. I hope failing to meet said target means that pressure has increased and the board are seriously considering the managerial situation in the summer.

I think you're making way way too much of this top 10 thing.

I think there's close to zero chance the board are considering the managerial situation.

[terrytini]

9 hours ago, sheepyvillian said:

Someone to put us on the front foot, attack minded and  a willingness to entertain . Thats how I want Aston Villa to be .

Well I could do that if you like ! I guess anyone could.

However...

For all the criticism Bruce gets - some of which I share - I think it's fair to assume that he must have reasons why he sets us up as he does........and they are, like Lambert, MacLeish and Black, likely to be because they think they are more likely to get results that way.....which in turn suggests they feel a more expansive approach wouldn't work.

Whilst I hold the view there is a better way - which happens to often lead to more entertaining football, but as a by product, not a goal - it wouldn't matter to me what philosophy a Manager came with, even if it was Pep, I would want him to assess the players we have, and if he then thought sitting deep and playing dour gritty football was the way most likely to get results I'd want exactly that.

I wouldn't want us to be a front foot, attack minded, entertaining, losing side !

[Demitri_C]

10 hours ago, NottingVilla said:

Chelsea and Real Madrid don't mess about with their managers and it doesn't do them any harm. And before someone says the obvious, in monetary terms, we are a Chelsea/Real Madrid of this league.

Rolling out excuses and cliches about needing time to gel and build his own team is a load of old bollocks.

We should have been walking these league.

You may argue the disparity between a top level player in the Premiership or La Liga vs the rest would be much greater a top level Championship player vs the rest , but not to the extent of mediocrity we've shown, surely?

SB seems a bit of  soft touch to me, we need someone to grab the club via the balls. 

Newcastle didnt even walk it so how could we? 

[TheStagMan]

9 hours ago, sheepyvillian said:

It's a crime for such humour to go over certain heads. 

Just like the ball and most of our midfield then

[HeyAnty]

36 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Newcastle didnt even walk it so how could we? 

Newcastle had a poor team but were very well organized and managed.  They will require a big shake up to their squad if they are to stay in the premiership.

[thabucks]

Mods is it okay to start a thread that us non believers in Bruce can discuss potential replacements for him as speculation rather than clog up and derail this thread ? I realise that all evidence too date points to the fact he will be here (unfortunately) next season but I'd like to be able to talk about who I'd wish to replace him. 

[markavfc40]

14 hours ago, DCJonah said:

I hope failing to meet said target means that pressure has increased and the board are seriously considering the managerial situation in the summer.

There is not a cat in hells chance of that happening mate. Wyness stated at the end of the dire run we had in Jan/Feb that regardless of what happened this season Bruce would be manager next season. I doubt had that dire run have continued that would have been the case but given that the last couple of months have gone ok results wise then I would think there is next to zero chance of him being replaced.

As for the top 10 thing I think it was just a statement to give the players something to aim for rather than letting the season peter out but it was no more than that and certainly wouldn’t have been a veiled threat from those above the manager.

Going back to what Wyness said with regard to Bruce a couple of months ago he referred to the fact that there were so many issues at the club that needed addressing that it took everyone by surprise. It suggested in hindsight that promotion this season was never a realistic aim. I think what made many people feel it could be, including me by the way, was that we threw money around like confetti last summer. That alone doesn’t address deeply ingrained issues overnight though does it. Firstly that money has to be spent well and given that it left us with an unbalanced squad then it wasn’t. Secondly it is reliant on a manager having a plan as to how he is going to start to fit all the pieces together and in RDM we had a manager who didn’t have a clue despite assembling the squad. Then we come to Bruce. He inherits that unbalanced squad. A squad that had won one of its first 12 games, that was rock bottom on confidence, and a club still hung over after a disastrous season and one which had won a handful of games in over a year and hadn’t won away from home at all in that time. Put simply a club with a losers mentality running right through it. That is what Steve Bruce came into just 6 months ago.

Since then we have done okay. The backwards trajectory has been halted and the ship had been steadied. On the positive side defensively we are pretty solid, our home record since Bruce arrived is good. On the negative side offensively we are too reliant on one player, we often look disjointed and our away form is poor.

There are some foundations to build on now. The simple fact we are no longer a club going backwards is one. We then have the fact we will go into next season with a manager who won’t have to spend the first few months getting to know most of his players. Likewise we will go into next season with the vast majority of the squad having been together for at least half a season, that will have had a full pre season together. That kind of stability has to make a difference. In fact just looking at the league table tells you it does. All the teams in the top 6 have managers that had been at their clubs since at least before pre season last summer. Look at the likes of Fulham and Huddersfield and their managers went in mid way through the 2015/16 season and initially struggled finishing 19th and 20th respectively. This season they are flying.

Bruce’s record suggests in terms of gaining promotion he is worth sticking with and looking at other clubs and the merits of having some stability suggests giving a manager more than a few months can reap rewards. We’d be stupid to throw away the last 6 months rendering them pointless instead we need to have some stability and by doing so I am confident this season will prove to have have been a necessary, if sometimes painful tool, in next season being a successful one.

Edited May 4, 2017 by markavfc40

[AntrimBlack]

If the die has been cast and we stick with Bruce, then the club are taking one helluva chance.

I hope it succeeds.

[sheepyvillian]

1 hour ago, TheStagMan said:

Just like the ball and most of our midfield then

Your in the zone now, aren't you?  I shouldn't of encouraged you  .

[mykeyb]

9 hours ago, TRO said:

i think he now realises he had weaknesses, he was at first dubious of.....now he knows....those weaknesses have effected the balance of the team.

How do you know he knows or are you assuming he knows and dont know that he knows for sure.

 

let us know.

[Demitri_C]

1 hour ago, HeyAnty said:

Newcastle had a poor team but were very well organized and managed.  They will require a big shake up to their squad if they are to stay in the premiership.

If Newcastle had a poor team what have We! They are far better than us!

[Godders]

50 minutes ago, AntrimBlack said:

If the die has been cast and we stick with Bruce, then the club are taking one helluva chance.

I hope it succeeds.

And sacking him now and getting someone else in, starting the journey fron scratch again wouldn't be taking one helluva chance?

There's significant risk in both, and that's the nature of football. There's no guarantee that Bruce will get us up. There's no guarantee anyone else will get us up. Painting it any other way is naive at best.

For me, there is less risk in keeping Bruce than there is getting rid of him now.

Edited May 4, 2017 by Godders

[sheepyvillian]

12 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

If Newcastle had a poor team what have We! They are far better than us!

They were just better managed .

[sheepyvillian]

2 hours ago, terrytini said:

Well I could do that if you like ! I guess anyone could.

However...

For all the criticism Bruce gets - some of which I share - I think it's fair to assume that he must have reasons why he sets us up as he does........and they are, like Lambert, MacLeish and Black, likely to be because they think they are more likely to get results that way.....which in turn suggests they feel a more expansive approach wouldn't work.

Whilst I hold the view there is a better way - which happens to often lead to more entertaining football, but as a by product, not a goal - it wouldn't matter to me what philosophy a Manager came with, even if it was Pep, I would want him to assess the players we have, and if he then thought sitting deep and playing dour gritty football was the way most likely to get results I'd want exactly that.

I wouldn't want us to be a front foot, attack minded, entertaining, losing side !

I don't want us to be a back foot ,defensive minded , losing side , which is what we were under all those managers you named . Maybe if they had been a bit more adventurous in their approach, we wouldn't be where we are today .

[Demitri_C]

52 minutes ago, sheepyvillian said:

They were just better managed .

Nope they are better than us. I don't get enjoyment out of saying it but that is the reality of the situation.

[sne]

I have a feeling that if us and Newcastle had swapped managers this season, we managed by Rafa would finisher higher in the table than Newcastle managed by Bruce.

But I don't think the difference in points would be as big as it is now.

All speculation of course.