Steve Bruce

[dn1982]

40 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Hmm calderwood was a defender and we have had more clean sheets with him than before him

I think there is no foundation to this whatsoever 

I think might just be a coincidence but since he arrived we've become a lot more negative and the footballs been atrocious. I think Bruce is a cautious manager so he probably needs an attack minded number 2 instead of having another defence minded one. I'd rather lose a few clean sheets and see more attacking intent. 

[Guest av1]

2 hours ago, Demitri_C said:

Hmm calderwood was a defender and we have had more clean sheets with him than before him

I think there is no foundation to this whatsoever 

I can't agree with this at all, or indeed the notion that we have a good defence based on stats. 

Our defence has been shambolic at times this season. The reason the stats look good is down to Bruce's pragmatic style of play. 

We can't bemoan the fact that our midfield barely crosses the half way line and and yet praise the defence for keeping clean sheets. 

 

 

 

[andym]

Yeah, many times we've had a back 4, Jedinak playing about 10 yards in front, and then Lansbury also sitting deep.

There would be something seriously wrong if we were conceding lots of goals with that setup. 

It's been completely detrimental to us scoring goals though. We need to be scoring 20 to 30 more next season.

Edited May 13, 2017 by andym

[DaveAV1]

32 minutes ago, av1 said:

I can't agree with this at all, or indeed the notion that we have a good defence based on stats. 

Our defence has been shambolic at times this season. The reason the stats look good is down to Bruce's pragmatic style of play. 

We can't bemoan the fact that our midfield barely crosses the half way line and and yet praise the defence for keeping clean sheets. 

 

 

 

Actually the stats don't look good we've conceded almost exactly the same number of goals per game under Steve Bruce as we did under RDM. And as you say we've sacrificed any semblance of attacking play. 

[sheepyvillian]

That would be typical Villa , sack Bruce ,then appoint Moyes . If I could pick anyone I'd go with Dean Smith .

[skarroki]

10 hours ago, Michael118 said:

So he was fine in January but ruined in August?

In those 4 Premier League games we won against Crystal Palace, drew with Leicester and drew with West Brom. The first match he was involved in was a loss to Sunderland but he was a late substitute coming on after 76 mins. This was in our worst season ever where we only managed 3 wins and 8 draws over the whole season. Before he came in we hadn't won in 19 matches and after he got injured we lost 13 of the next 15. He's the kind of player who has an impact even if he doesn't necessarily get on the scoresheet.

I know this is the wrong thread to continue to discuss this, but it would be interesting to know which of the games you're quoting as Kozak having an impact and being part of our change in form you actually saw. Because anyone watching him would probably tell you about the sheer lack of impact or general ability he has.

I would be astonished if he finds himself playing in a top European division by September. I'd say he's more likely to retire. 

I know you're known for suggesting our least popular players are in fact our best ones and we would be winning every game with them on the pitch but surely even you could see Kozak has had no future at villa for the best part of 3 years. 

[Demitri_C]

1 hour ago, av1 said:

I can't agree with this at all, or indeed the notion that we have a good defence based on stats. 

Our defence has been shambolic at times this season. The reason the stats look good is down to Bruce's pragmatic style of play. 

We can't bemoan the fact that our midfield barely crosses the half way line and and yet praise the defence for keeping clean sheets. 

 

 

 

You might not agree with it but name me a season in last 3 years we have had as many clean sheets?

[Guest av1]

9 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

You might not agree with it but name me a season in last 3 years we have had as many clean sheets?

Lets not consider opposition or style of play then. Thats such a naive post mate..

[Demitri_C]

3 minutes ago, av1 said:

Lets not consider opposition or style of play then. Thats such a naive post mate..

Style of play I am hearing this too much lately. The football is not great but if we were sitting 2nd who would care?

That's the facts opposition doesn't come into because the team is generally weaker than the last few years. 

[Guest av1]

1 minute ago, Demitri_C said:

Style of play I am hearing this too much lately. The football is not great but if we were sitting 2nd who would care?

 

And the reason we aren't 2nd is because we don't score enough goals on account of our midfield is sat 40 yards behind a lone striker, effectively operating as DEFENDERS against power house strikers such as Jackson Irvine.

Can you honestly not see this?

 

[Demitri_C]

20 minutes ago, av1 said:

And the reason we aren't 2nd is because we don't score enough goals on account of our midfield is sat 40 yards behind a lone striker, effectively operating as DEFENDERS against power house strikers such as Jackson Irvine.

Can you honestly not see this?

 

Scoring goals is a completely different point. On that subject I agree Bruce's tactics for scoring has been too negative and white needs improving. However defensively I feel we have improved under him. Like Taylor has been an improvement on amavi. Chester over Richards for example.

It's not perfect under Bruce but it's not all bad yet..

[Mantis]

One conclusion I've drawn from the past few years is that it doesn't seem to matter what we try but nothing works. Players, managers, coaches - prior form seems have little impact. It's almost like certain things have become ingrained in the club during these many years of decline: weakness, negativity, a losing mentality and a lacklustre style of play. Everyone comes in and adapts to that template it seems. It's why I can't really get excited about any of our signings anymore because it's almost inevitable that they won't carry on previous form here. Same goes for managers. We're seemingly stuck in this continuous loop of shitness and negativity and I have no idea how to get out of it. I guess the one small solace we can take is that we didn't end up in a relegation battle this season (the first time in 7 years) but that is hardly anything to shout about - we should be doing much better than this.

This isn't a defence of Bruce by the way, just my assessment of where we are as a club.

Edited May 13, 2017 by Mantis

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

23 minutes ago, Mantis said:

One conclusion I've drawn from the past few years is that it doesn't seem to matter what we try but nothing works. Players, managers, coaches - prior form seems have little impact. It's almost like certain things have become ingrained in the club during these many years of decline: weakness, negativity, a losing mentality and a lacklustre style of play. Everyone comes in and adapts to that template it seems. It's why I can't really get excited about any of our signings anymore because it's almost inevitable that they won't carry on previous form here. Same goes for managers. We're seemingly stuck in this continuous loop of shitness and negativity and I have no idea how to get out of it. I guess the one small solace we can take is that we didn't end up in a relegation battle this season (the first time in 7 years) but that is hardly anything to shout about - we should be doing much better than this.

This isn't a defence of Bruce by the way, just my assessment of where we are as a club.

I don't think it's more that we have never had it ALL right at the same time.

We either have great players and shit manager.

Or, great manager, shit players and no money.

Or great players with inexplicable release clauses.

75 percent right, but random injury crisis at crucial times.

AFCON, Internationals etc.

Mix and match any of the above, we literally have just never had the synchronicity of everything being right at the same time.

[sheepyvillian]

1 hour ago, Demitri_C said:

Style of play I am hearing this too much lately. The football is not great but if we were sitting 2nd who would care?

That's the facts opposition doesn't come into because the team is generally weaker than the last few years. 

Who would care ? Me .

[MikeAVFC]

I really don't want to go through the hire and fire approach again. The football's been dire this season yes, but I'd rather see what he can do after a preseason. Maybe nothing will change, but I'd rather give him the benefit of the doubt for now.

[Villan_of_oz]

So in today's paper talk I think its a paper called the Sunday People (never heard of them) reckon that Steve Bruce has been given a transfer budget of just 1 million. This should make a few people happy.

 

 

 

 

Yes I'm trying to troll you. 

 

 

 

 

I'm not having a genuine go at anyone or their opinions. 

 

 

 

 

I hope I have clarified adequately I'm just poking a bit of fun. 

[DaveAV1]

Sunday Telegraph: Bruce has been given zero budget and must use loans and/or sell to buy. Apparently FFP means we can only lose £83m in three seasons and we're already up to £81m+. 

This could mean any of the following;

We've cocked up massively and Wyness saying ffp was all under control was bull and he needs to look at his position. 

They have a plan but are using ffp as an excuse to force Bruce out or at least not let him waste anymore money.

This story has come from the Bruce camp and he's looking for an escape root as he realises he's out of his depth/past it.

It's all a load of media bollocks and financially everything is fine. 

Any combination of the above. 

[DCJonah]

Well Xia tweets this morning and have left me feeling deflated. 

If we had a different manager and I'd seen different things last year I'd be fairly happy with not having a crazy summer. 

But I saw nothing to suggest Bruce will get us promoted with only a couple of new players coming in. 

[bobzy]

14 minutes ago, DaveAV1 said:

Sunday Telegraph: Bruce has been given zero budget and must use loans and/or sell to buy. Apparently FFP means we can only lose £83m in three seasons and we're already up to £81m+. 

This could mean any of the following;

We've cocked up massively and Wyness saying ffp was all under control was bull and he needs to look at his position. 

They have a plan but are using ffp as an excuse to force Bruce out or at least not let him waste anymore money.

This story has come from the Bruce camp and he's looking for an escape root as he realises he's out of his depth/past it.

It's all a load of media bollocks and financially everything is fine. 

On those points:

How do you come to the conclusion we've "cocked up"? Wyness saying. FFP is under control may well be because of a knowledge that we can no longer just throw the cash around and need to sell players too. 

Further, how do you come to the other two conclusions?!

We've spent £70m or whatever in the Championship. I imagine that's more in one season than any other club has spent during their entire time in the Championship. Our squad should be good enough to challenge for promotion. If not, sell the ones we don't want before we can bring other ones in. Simple.

[bobzy]

3 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

Well Xia tweets this morning and have left me feeling deflated. 

If we had a different manager and I'd seen different things last year I'd be fairly happy with not having a crazy summer. 

But I saw nothing to suggest Bruce will get us promoted with only a couple of new players coming in. 

There's really no need to repeat the same point. Let's just see what happens, eh? If it isn't working after about 10 games next season, he'll probably be sacked and we can start the circus up again.