Steve Bruce

[TRO]

10 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

I don't think he's been screwed over. He's not a rookie manager doing his first interview. This man was captain of Manchester united, been a premier league manager for years and was in the running for the England job. I'm sure Bruce knows how a story might be presented by the answers he provides. 

This interview isn't the only one where he's mentioned FFP as well. I think Bruce is well aware of the messages he's putting out there. A bit like Lambert and Sherwood did when the pressure really started to build, trying to control the narrative and the image for if it all goes wrong. 

I'd have liked much more confidence from him in the week leading up to our first game. He's just pulled off another decent signing adding to what should be one of the best squads in the division. 

He looked tired to me, maybe none of us are at our best when we feel like that.

but in all honesty, its what happens on the pitch that we are all interested in.

[DCJonah]

8 minutes ago, TRO said:

He looked tired to me, maybe none of us are at our best when we feel like that.

but in all honesty, its what happens on the pitch that we are all interested in.

Yes, no one will care what he said or says if we win games and head towards the premier league. 

 

[AshVilla]

1st day of the season and there are 4 teams above us in the table

Bruce Out

[8pints]

4 hours ago, AshVilla said:

1st day of the season and there are 4 teams above us in the table

Bruce Out

Disgrace,

Many times over the years we were second at this point in the season.

[a m ole]

4 hours ago, AshVilla said:

1st day of the season and there are 4 teams above us in the table

Bruce Out

0 wins from 0 games though, that's a 100% win record. Sherwood couldn't even match that.

[Lichfield Dean]

8 hours ago, a m ole said:

0 wins from 0 games though, that's a 100% win record. Sherwood couldn't even match that.

Hmm. I got the following error message: "Divide by zero error at IsSteveBruceBetterThanTimSherwood.cs line 1"

[The Fun Factory]

On 04/08/2017 at 06:35, Demitri_C said:

it's simple really the McCormack, elphick and Tish transfers have put us in this position. 20m on utter shit with very poor resale value.

this club will they never learn?!

Yes in hindsight not great transfers. Tish is a 5 million player playing in the third tier and McCormack we are either going to take a big hit on a transfer fee or another year on loan to a rival club.

[TRO]

22 hours ago, villabromsgrove said:

I agree with you Trent.

I believe that we have a very decent squad of players. We certainly have enough experience and talent to expect a positive outcome to this season. Definitely play off's and possibly automatic promotion is there to be grasped .... but .... the way Bruce sets up his team on match day doesn't reflect the positive abilities of the players at his disposal. Our defence is tighter, but the link up play between midfield and strikers is still somewhere between basic and non existent and that will cost us.

 We have a manager and a coach with a mindset of stopping the opposition from beating us and hoping to snatch something, rather than setting out to outplay the opposition who in most cases are not quite as good as us. I agree with Trent that this "negative" approach may well cost us again in terms of confidence and results as this season wears on. 

Firstly, those comments are made ( i would guess)in the main from last season....pre season has been a work in progress analysis of which he has decided to bring in two midfielders.

His negative approach is based on the players he had and an attempt to improve the defence.....I see his focus shifting now to the offensive side, which will pleas many.

I am not sure we are still the finished article yet for this first phase of getting promotion.

I feel sure also that the improvement in defence will aid our offensive shortcomings.

Steve Bruce is well aware of the doubts upfront and with our most accomplished striker out just adds to the doubt.

We are flirting with the FFP threashold which is tampering with our transfer decisions, so all in all its tricky.

I think its premature to comment on how Bruce sets us up, whilst he is still bringing in players to aid the very notion that he is being criticised for.

Its clear to me that the very thing folk are labeling him for "negative play"....he is trying to address it.

every confidence for the forth coming season.

UTV

ps we will all have a clearer view this evening.

Edited August 5, 2017 by TRO

[markavfc40]

Over the summer you'd have to say he has done very well. He has assembled an excellent squad and managed to turn a very nice and needed profit which is no mean feet. If we take him at his word then he also thinks the players are in great shape fitness wise. He could therefore have done no more.

It is now down to him to ensure off the back of a good pre season we get it right where it matters on the pitch. I am confident we will but thankfully the talking is now over and over the coming months we will find out.  Bring it on I can't wait.

[Junxs]

Haven't commented in this thread for a while, but I must say I find the comments on Grealish very odd, he used him sparingly last season and not really giving him a proper run despite looking like one of the few players who could do something, Bruce had him in and out of the side and rarely allowed him the full 90 when he did select him.

He had the whole of preseason to rectify our attacking shortcomings - then only after the injury (not before) he comes out with plans of building the team around Grealish? I don't buy it.

[TRO]

32 minutes ago, Junxs said:

Haven't commented in this thread for a while, but I must say I find the comments on Grealish very odd, he used him sparingly last season and not really giving him a proper run despite looking like one of the few players who could do something, Bruce had him in and out of the side and rarely allowed him the full 90 when he did select him.

He had the whole of preseason to rectify our attacking shortcomings - then only after the injury (not before) he comes out with plans of building the team around Grealish? I don't buy it.

just a thought.

it could be  that maybe Bruce can see that the lad is somewhat exposed and the type of player he is , we was short of players to kinda protect him or allow him more space to roam and hurt teams.....so the jury was out on him.

Steve Bruce looked to get players in who would possibly help him.....making Jack possibly central to his offensive thoughts.

Whelan is just that kind of player.....He then wanted to put his theories in to practice to see if it works, (thats what building a squad back from oblivion is all about.) and he picks up a nasty injury.....plans scuppered.

Some of all this is trial and error and hopefully we will get stronger and stronger......I think a Jack Grealish in this team with the new faces, could be quite different from the Jack Grealish of last season.

Its a bit suck it and see....unfortunately that bit of theory is now on the back burner and we have Josh.

I think Steve Bruces comments were based of what he was expecting as opposed to what he had in pre-season, because Glenn Whelan came relatively late.

Edited August 5, 2017 by TRO

[Junxs]

4 minutes ago, TRO said:

just a thought.

it could be  that maybe Bruce can see that the lad is somewhat exposed and the type of player he is , we was short of players to kinda protect him or allow him more space to roam and hurt teams.....so the jury was out on him.

Steve Bruce looked to get players in who would possibly help him.....making Jack possibly central to his offensive thoughts.

Whelan is just that kind of player.....He then wanted to put his theories in to practice to see if it works, (thats what building a squad back from oblivion is all about.) and he picks up a nasty injury.....plans scuppered.

Some of all this is trial and error and hopefully we will get stronger and stronger......I think a Jack Grealish in this team with the new faces, could be quite different from the Jack Grealish of last season.

Its a bit suck it and see....unfortunately that bit of theory is now on the back burner and we have Josh.

I think Steve Bruces comments were based of what he was expecting as opposed to what he had in pre-season, because Glenn Whelan came relatively late.

So Bruce was holding back Grealish last year because we didn't have a player like Whelan to protect him? riiigght. 

Theres sticking up for the boss and believing in him and I admire that, but you're taking it to the next level mate. 

I'm just worried that he is trying to make the Grealish injury into something more than it is. I see a player that was used sparingly under Bruce get injured for 3 months so it gives Bruce the opportunity to have a ready made reason if things don't go as well as planned in the first few weeks. 

[TRO]

14 minutes ago, Junxs said:

So Bruce was holding back Grealish last year because we didn't have a player like Whelan to protect him? riiigght. 

Theres sticking up for the boss and believing in him and I admire that, but you're taking it to the next level mate. 

I'm just worried that he is trying to make the Grealish injury into something more than it is. I see a player that was used sparingly under Bruce get injured for 3 months so it gives Bruce the opportunity to have a ready made reason if things don't go as well as planned in the first few weeks. 

No, No, No.

you have misread what I am saying or I am not explaining my thoughts very well......you still may not agree, but let me try again.

and by the way protect is perhaps not the right word, they do all the ugly stuff and negate the opposition player that would probably have taken Jack ( and the likes ) out.

Steve Bruce has never held Grealish back.....but when offensive players have no protection i.e no DM  they can get overrun by the opposition.....they lose the ball, they get out muscled, they get out fought, their heads drop and they start drifting in and out of the game.....they effectively become passengers......and subsequently the team loses ground.

Look, I don't mind if you disagree and hey, I said its just a thought......I have a strong hunch I am right, but no one can be certain too may factors to argue.

Unless you have totally world class offensive players, who can clearly take care of themselves.......some of the lesser ones need help.

lets get this clear, I am not sticking up for the boss,unconditionally, just offering alternative theories to avoid keep referring back to him for every conceivable problem.

but we will see shortly.

 

Edited August 5, 2017 by TRO

[vreitti]

3 hours ago, TRO said:

I see his focus shifting now to the offensive side, which will pleas many.

When exactly do you see this happening? Christmas time? You don't think he should've already been doing this during the preseason?

Tbh, I've now come to terms with Bruce's brand of football. If it gets us promoted, I won't complain no more. That is a big IF though. Fortunately we'll soon find out. 

Difficult to contain my excitement for the upcoming season, even though I think Bruce is a terrible manager.

UTV.

[TRO]

1 minute ago, vreitti said:

When exactly do you see this happening? Christmas time? You don't think he should've already been doing this during the preseason?

Tbh, I've now come to terms with Bruce's brand of football. If it gets us promoted, I won't complain no more. That is a big IF though. Fortunately we'll soon find out. 

Difficult to contain my excitement for the upcoming season, even though I think Bruce is a terrible manager.

UTV.

I think he is doing it now....I think he wants another Striker, I think Elmo will help with crosses.....I think Onomah will add a bit flair too.

[vreitti]

1 minute ago, TRO said:

I think he is doing it now....I think he wants another Striker, I think Elmo will help with crosses.....I think Onomah will add a bit flair too.

Okay, fair enough. Don't get me wrong, the defensive side needed bolstering as well, and I believe he has succeeded in that department. They aren't mutually exclusive though, and I think he should've been doing work on the offensive front from day one of preseason as well.

[Junxs]

2 minutes ago, TRO said:

No, No, No.

you have misread what I am saying or I am not explaining my thoughts very well......you still may not agree, but let me try again.

and by the way protect is perhaps not the right word, they do all the ugly stuff and negate the opposition player that would probably have taken Jack ( and the likes ) out.

Steve Bruce has never held Grealish back.....but when offensive players have no protection i.e no DM  they can get overrun by the opposition.....they lose the ball, they get out muscled, they get out fought, there heads drop.

Look, I don't mind if you disagree and hey, I said its just a thought......I have a strong hunch I am right, but no one can be certain too may factors to argue.

Unless you have totally world class offensive players, who can clearly take care of themselves.......some of the lesser ones need help.

lets get this clear, I am not sticking up for the boss,unconditionally, just offering alternative theories to avoid keep referring back to him for every conceivable problem.

 

Well, I see what you are trying to say, but really Jedinak was there last season where Whelan is this season, and Lansbury is a hard knock. So I don't think that's the reason why Bruce chose not to play Grealish so much though. So we'll have to just disagree on that.

I just don't see what Grealish has done in the last few months to go from a rotation player to one Bruce stated he was going to build the formation around. (after he got injured not before)

[sne]

1 minute ago, Junxs said:

Well, I see what you are trying to say, but really Jedinak was there last season where Whelan is this season, and Lansbury is a hard knock. So I don't think that's the reason why Bruce chose not to play Grealish so much though. So we'll have to just disagree on that.

I just don't see what Grealish has done in the last few months to go from a rotation player to one Bruce stated he was going to build the formation around. (after he got injured not before)

Well he did have a nice restful holiday with the England U-21 side. 0 minutes played. 

[TRO]

1 minute ago, vreitti said:

Okay, fair enough. Don't get me wrong, the defensive side needed bolstering as well, and I believe he has succeeded in that department. They aren't mutually exclusive though, and I think he should've been doing work on the offensive front from day one of preseason as well.

I'm not so sure.....you get one bit right and when you are happy, focus on the next bit.

"You can't eat an Elephant in one bite"

I think that is possibly where some fans have misunderstood What Steve Bruce is doing.

[TRO]

5 minutes ago, Junxs said:

Well, I see what you are trying to say, but really Jedinak was there last season where Whelan is this season, and Lansbury is a hard knock. So I don't think that's the reason why Bruce chose not to play Grealish so much though. So we'll have to just disagree on that.

I just don't see what Grealish has done in the last few months to go from a rotation player to one Bruce stated he was going to build the formation around. (after he got injured not before)

He hasn't yet, thats what  we are debating.

• Jedinak is not as mobile as Whelan
• Lansbury is not a hard knock for me.

Steve Bruce knows what he is doing.