Steve Bruce

[Villarocker]

Using TRO's inspirational quotes I hereby declare that I think Bruce has found the secret formula to the Villa and we will now go on to tear every team in this league a new arsehole whilst proclaiming that our youth are the best young players ever to be seen, Conor Hourihane will be leading goalscorer in the league, Bruce will win manager of the season and, John Terry will stay on to Captain us in the Premier League next season AND want to play both games against Chelsea!

[TRO]

14 minutes ago, Woody1000 said:

One little concern for me over Bruce's promotion record is that he has never actually won the title, he has had two 2nd place finishes and the other 2 were via the playoffs. I'm not trying to find a stick to beat him with, and I wouldn't be dismayed about going up in 2nd place, but it does worry me that he doesn't have that knack for getting a team right to the top, even if it's from an "aim for first to finish second" point of view.

The point is he has only demonstrated that he understands the criteria for gaining promotion.....there are no guarantees in this business.....what he has done in the past is purely an indication, thats all.

He doesn't have the same players he gained promotion with, which is a pretty significant feature, he isn't facing the same opposition either so parallels are ify

many managers have only ever done it once, so what do we glean from that?

i think we read too many things in to Steve Bruce.....good or bad.

He has to win matches, its as simple or difficult as that.

[TRO]

2 minutes ago, villarocker said:

Using TRO's inspirational quotes I hereby declare that I think Bruce has found the secret formula to the Villa and we will now go on to tear every team in this league a new arsehole whilst proclaiming that our youth are the best young players ever to be seen, Conor Hourihane will be leading goalscorer in the league, Bruce will win manager of the season and, John Terry will stay on to Captain us in the Premier League next season AND want to play both games against Chelsea!

Well a tad of hyperbole there may I say VR

However, i do actually think some of these young guns are showing signs of being inspirational assets in our quest......ably assisted by some old heads.

[omariqy]

 

5 hours ago, TrentVilla said:

Sigh.

As events and situations change so does my opinion, I think that makes a little more sense than taking a stance and sticking to it regardless of circumstance. Seemingly you think the later is preferable, to each their own.

But I have no reason to need to eat humble pie, now or in the event of any kind of imaging run of form which you wish to conjure.

I'm not the subject of this thread so I'm not sure why you are trying to make me it, I've no desire to be it. 

I have simply expressed my views on Bruce, which have changed over a period of time. Last season I was in favour of giving him time, I was more concerned with results than possession stats and I wanted stability. But I said I wanted to see improvement in the way we played and the performances he got from the players he signed.

I raised questions in the summer for what I perceived as being a lack of progress despite him bringing in some good additions. I also raised concerns about some of his comments, a view which I still hold.

I was then unhappy with the level of performance and some of the decisions made in our opening three games and I would still say rightly so. 

My view of Bruce hasn't been improved by his attitude towards what I think has been justified criticism.

The last two games have been better, it will just take longer than that to alter my view which was formed over far more than three games.

My view of Bruce after 10 or 15 games will likely reflect how we perform in those games. I fail to see an issue with that.

I note though that you seem not to understand the word fickle, it has been so widely misused post O'Leary.

The fact I haven't done about turn on Bruce after two games means I'm not fickle but feel free to think what you wish frankly I'm really not interested.

Pretty much word for word how I feel about it all. 

[mykeyb]

2 hours ago, TRO said:

No

what i have stated is that the players take the credit or criticism for their performance during that game.....which is entirely different from player good on wins /manager bad on loses.

The manager takes the praise or criticism over a much longer period for his work imo.

So you didnt say the poor team performances were down to players who are not up to the required standard and they were beyond the managers control once over the white line?

[terrytini]

I seem to recall players attitude, character, ability, desire and pretty much everything else being criticised. Not least of all by Bruce, never mind TRO !!

The problem - IMO then, and now,was the approach, the selection, the tactics. That was clear as day - to me -going back to last Autumn. 

Its equally clear he tweaked it at the weekend and last night and the results many expected have followed. 

Having reached the end of my tether with him after Cardiff and Reading all I cared about was having him gone - for me every game he stayed would be a game wasted. Based of course on the fact he'd had all last season and all pre- season to adopt a more positive approach, and clearly hadn't done so.

He's changed it. If that remains the case that's great. I'll be delighted. It's better for everyone if we don't have to change the Manager.

The world and his wife can now see what many could already see - we have a really decent squad, and a very good 14. 

The success of that squad depends now almost entirely on the Manager doing his bit.

 

[Villarocker]

4 hours ago, TRO said:

Well a tad of hyperbole there may I say VR

However, i do actually think some of these young guns are showing signs of being inspirational assets in our quest......ably assisted by some old heads.

I wasn't taking the pee mate, just using your inspiration because I've allowed myself to get down about the Villa too much lately. All I ask of Bruce now is for him to let the shackles off the team and use the old adage that if they are good enough then they are old enough.

Like you, I think we have some exciting young prospects and I am hoping they are given chance to shine and improve.

[TRO]

4 hours ago, mykeyb said:

So you didnt say the poor team performances were down to players who are not up to the required standard and they were beyond the managers control once over the white line?

Possibly/ largely yes, the managers job is done during the week.....why what is your take on it?

do you want the manager to run on the pitch and do it for  them?

you can arrange shite any way you like, but it comes out as shite.

you can tell players or advise them, but they will do their own thing.they have to be responsible for their performances.

the last 2 games the players deserve huge credit.

Steve Bruce will be ultimately responsible for where we finish, not where we start.

 

 

Edited August 23, 2017 by TRO

[TRO]

4 hours ago, terrytini said:

I seem to recall players attitude, character, ability, desire and pretty much everything else being criticised. Not least of all by Bruce, never mind TRO !!

The problem - IMO then, and now,was the approach, the selection, the tactics. That was clear as day - to me -going back to last Autumn. 

Its equally clear he tweaked it at the weekend and last night and the results many expected have followed. 

Having reached the end of my tether with him after Cardiff and Reading all I cared about was having him gone - for me every game he stayed would be a game wasted. Based of course on the fact he'd had all last season and all pre- season to adopt a more positive approach, and clearly hadn't done so.

He's changed it. If that remains the case that's great. I'll be delighted. It's better for everyone if we don't have to change the Manager.

The world and his wife can now see what many could already see - we have a really decent squad, and a very good 14. 

The success of that squad depends now almost entirely on the Manager doing his bit.

 

I think its as clear as mud.

players click and gain confidence from it and that confidence becomes contagious and before you know where we are, we are playing well.....every player has an effect on another, good or bad and when many find form it spreads....this is what time together brings with plenty of other good stuff, we don't see at BMH.

Steve Bruce is blamed far too much for intricacy that lies with the players.They are the ones that have to do it....and they are the ones that deserve the praise or criticism  game by game.....the manager had to be judged over a longer period.I am not in a position tp pass judgment on his work at BMH.....I can only rely on results.

I would suspect this is the case at most clubs.....managers can only do so much, they can't play for them , just advise and manage, they are limited in how much control they have.

[srsmithusa]

17 minutes ago, TRO said:

I think its as clear as mud.

players click and gain confidence from it and that confidence becomes contagious and before you know where we are, we are playing well.....every player has an effect on another, good or bad and when many find form it spreads....this is what time together brings with plenty of other good stuff, we don't see at BMH.

Steve Bruce is blamed far too much for intricacy that lies with the players.They are the ones that have to do it....and they are the ones that deserve the praise or criticism  game by game.....the manager had to be judged over a longer period.I am not in a position tp pass judgment on his work at BMH.....I can only rely on results.

I would suspect this is the case at most clubs.....managers can only do so much, they can't play for them , just advise and manage, they are limited in how much control they have.

Here is your explanation as i understand it.  Bruce has been working diligently and hard for 10 months to make many necessary changes.  His effort accomplished dismal performances, much of last season and the start of this season.  The reasons his efforts were all in vain was because players are not talented, or couldn't be arsed, or lacked confidence.  That was evident in the first 3 games of the league this year.   Then one day, last week (TBF - over three days - Weds, Thurs, Fri) last week.  Everything changed.  His long, diligent efforts transformed untalented, lazy, non-confident players into a hard working and effective machine over three days.

Can you see why I'm having a little trouble buying it.  22 players (that's a different 11 at Norwich and Wigan) were all magically infused with talent and passion and confidence and all at the same time.  That sounds more supernatural than football.  (I know, "hand of God.")

It seems much more likely that one man changed than that 22 changed simultaneously.  The questions in my mind are what did Steve Bruce change?  Why did he change it?  Will he keep this changed thing whatever it is, or revert to the ineffective things he did for 10 months?

 

[terrytini]

I won't requote the whole post again but simply put I don't blame Bruce for much at all.

I blame him for one thing. He's been too negative. 

Now he's not, and all the other things he's done, which he's done well, are having effect.

Dead simple, not unclear at all to me !!

[terrytini]

Nearest other example I can think of is Wenger.

Ask a million people and they'll say he's needed to toughen his midfield for 10 years.

However much else he does right, he has had a blind spot there.

Doesnt mean he's hopeless, doesn't mean his players are.

Likewise Bruce. Good purchases, good approach, etc etc, all okay. Too negative - blind spot.

Changed that. Off we go.

If he changes back as sure as eggs is eggs we will see the failings return. If he doesn't, we won't.

[srsmithusa]

4 minutes ago, terrytini said:

I won't requote the whole post again but simply put I don't blame Bruce for much at all.

I blame him for one thing. He's been too negative. 

Now he's not, and all the other things he's done, which he's done well, are having effect.

Dead simple, not unclear at all to me !!

You may be completely right.  But if you are, does that not place all the blame for our really poor performances at his feet.  His negativity was restraining the players and all the good things (whatever those are) he was doing....?  So, his negativity has been the problem all along then. (?)  Well, since shortly after he arrived, obviously.

[terrytini]

7 minutes ago, srsmithusa said:

You may be completely right.  But if you are, does that not place all the blame for our really poor performances at his feet.  His negativity was restraining the players and all the good things (whatever those are) he was doing....?  So, his negativity has been the problem all along then. (?)  Well, since shortly after he arrived, obviously.

Yes.

[terrytini]

Or to expand, his good points included having a good idea what was wrong and who was wrong, of being a decent man Manager, of instilling a sense of 'safe hands', of buying well, and of knowing we needed to tackle a mental fragility.

Refardless of stats we certainly became harder to beat. By which I don't mean we lost less, just that it was less a 'given' that we would crumble.

In so doing he saved what I think was a sinking ship, but was SO concerned with that aspect it dominated everything. We went into games trying to make sure we didn't lose.

On Saturday and the yesterday we didn't.

Before anyone mentions it, I'm well aware this is just my view, and others are available !!

[TRO]

1 hour ago, srsmithusa said:

Here is your explanation as i understand it.  Bruce has been working diligently and hard for 10 months to make many necessary changes.  His effort accomplished dismal performances, much of last season and the start of this season.  The reasons his efforts were all in vain was because players are not talented, or couldn't be arsed, or lacked confidence.  That was evident in the first 3 games of the league this year.   Then one day, last week (TBF - over three days - Weds, Thurs, Fri) last week.  Everything changed.  His long, diligent efforts transformed untalented, lazy, non-confident players into a hard working and effective machine over three days.

Can you see why I'm having a little trouble buying it.  22 players (that's a different 11 at Norwich and Wigan) were all magically infused with talent and passion and confidence and all at the same time.  That sounds more supernatural than football.  (I know, "hand of God.")

It seems much more likely that one man changed than that 22 changed simultaneously.  The questions in my mind are what did Steve Bruce change?  Why did he change it?  Will he keep this changed thing whatever it is, or revert to the ineffective things he did for 10 months?

 

That first paragraph is your interpretation, which is pie in the sky for me.....not only is it a failed attempt to interpret my comments its a derisory attempt too.

you have your view.....i have mine.

do you think he has a magic wand that can magic up performances like that as equally he can influence / mess up such a drop against cardiff .....its fanciful.

[mykeyb]

Sometimes a manager can be made or broken by one key moment, see Robbins and Sir Alex for a case in point. I wonder if Bruce having little choice but to play Davis on Saturday may just by the turning point for SB.

It's really up or down to him now to see if it's a false dawn or the real deal.

[srsmithusa]

TRO - sorry, I did not intend to sound derisory, I was trying to explain how I hear your argument.  I was hoping you could clarify

you are right that we see things differently. But from my perspective we both tend to be somewhat reasonable, so I enjoy the interchanges.  

And no, I don't think his magic wand.  I think he was forced to use Davis and took off the overly conservative shackles he had previously in place.  

[TRO]

12 minutes ago, srsmithusa said:

TRO - sorry, I did not intend to sound derisory, I was trying to explain how I hear your argument.  I was hoping you could clarify

you are right that we see things differently. But from my perspective we both tend to be somewhat reasonable, so I enjoy the interchanges.  

And no, I don't think his magic wand.  I think he was forced to use Davis and took off the overly conservative shackles he had previously in place.  

He wasn't forced to play Davis.....He could have played RHM as I understand.

Davis played very well and was instrumental/ aided  other players to play very well in the process.

I read the interpretations of events as clobber Bruce at every opportunity and deny him credit when it is reasonable to grant it.

I am not saying that I am adamant that steve bruce gets praise for keinan davis's performance, but what i am saying is , then you cannot clobber him for some poor ones.

i am looking for a balanced view and sorry, in some posts i don't see it.

some say they want Bruce to do well, because Villa will be doing well, well i see the correlation, but i don't always see the sentiment.

 

[terrytini]

I don't see anything saying clobber Bruce anywhere !!

The vast majority of people who were or aren't happy with him have simply said " good, he's stopped being negative, keep it that way".

I really don't se much other than that.