Dean Smith

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

3 hours ago, Philosopher said:

Way to early to make fergie comparisons. I think he is very different in style to fergie, in fact I think he is closer to Wenger than Fergie. He has a lot to prove, but he is at the best place to do it, and its looks to be the best time too!

Also I think is untrue and unfair to potato-head to lay the turnaround all on Dean Smith. Bruce brought in the likes of Hourihane and McGinn, he sorted out the dressing mess, and got us organised and competing for promotion (**** up by decimating our defense before he got sacked). Plus it's down to Bruce that Terry became associated with our club. I don't like the football we played, I hated they way he spoke about the fans, but he has to take half the credit for turning things around as he stabilised the club, and in hindsight was the right man at the right time for the club, as Smith is now.

Without sounding like I hate Bruce (I kinda do now).

We're these Bruce's signing, or the board/scouting team?

[Philosopher]

31 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

Without sounding like I hate Bruce (I kinda do now).

We're these Bruce's signing, or the board/scouting team?

Were Nakamba and Guilbert Smith's signing or the scouting team's? 

Most of the time a manager has the final say in a players acquisition. In the case of Conor I'm pretty sure, in the case of Terry, I don't think we sign him without Bruce. As for McGinn I'm pretty sure the DoF and CEO had been sacked and Bruce was pretty much running the club on his own, as WTF does Xia know about football!

[Villan4Life]

1 hour ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

Without sounding like I hate Bruce (I kinda do now).

We're these Bruce's signing, or the board/scouting team?

73 year old Scout Stan Ternant (ex Burnley, Hull, Bury and other clubs Manager) recommended Andy Robertson to Bruce whilst he was at Hull and Bruce signed him. Stan also recommended John McGinn to Bruce which who he signed for Villa.

Bruce trusted Ternant's recommendations and are they are also good friends.

Edited October 17, 2019 by Villan4Life

[tomav84]

1 hour ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

Without sounding like I hate Bruce (I kinda do now).

We're these Bruce's signing, or the board/scouting team?

FML it's been over a year since we got rid of him, the dust has settled, and we're better off. yet we still cannot possibly bear to give him any credit?!

he bought those players in on his own. he had no scouts, no DOF. he did the mcginn deal, the tammy deal, and the terry deal the year prior, on his own.

back on topic, i love smith...i'm so pleased we have him...but he couldn't have done what bruce did that summer on his own

[Tomaszk]

1 hour ago, Villan4Life said:

73 year old Scout Stan Ternant (ex Burnley, Hull, Bury and other clubs Manager) recommended Andy Robertson to Bruce whilst he was at Hull and Bruce signed him. Stan also recommended John McGinn to Bruce which who he signed for Villa.

Bruce trusted Ternant's recommendations and are they are also good friends.

Heard this as well.

Too old school for modern management so keeps himself busy scouting Scotland and Northern England.

[Vive_La_Villa]

1 hour ago, tomav84 said:

FML it's been over a year since we got rid of him, the dust has settled, and we're better off. yet we still cannot possibly bear to give him any credit?!

he bought those players in on his own. he had no scouts, no DOF. he did the mcginn deal, the tammy deal, and the terry deal the year prior, on his own.

back on topic, i love smith...i'm so pleased we have him...but he couldn't have done what bruce did that summer on his own

Not trying to discredit Bruce but I don’t think Mcginn was identified in the summer. We would have monitored him all season. 

But end of the day whether there are DOF or scouts it’s always the manager that takes credit or criticism for how signings turn out so credit to Bruce for the transfers he completed last summer (apart from Nyland who is probably the worse keeper I’ve ever seen).

 I think the problem was the transfers he didn’t manage to complete along with the players he let go out on loan. We had no defence.

[barry'sboots]

Don't know why we are still discussing Bruce.  He has gone - thank god - and we are in a much better place.  At least Smith understands where people are able to play!

[TRO]

15 hours ago, Philosopher said:

Way to early to make fergie comparisons. I think he is very different in style to fergie, in fact I think he is closer to Wenger than Fergie. He has a lot to prove, but he is at the best place to do it, and its looks to be the best time too!

Also I think is untrue and unfair to potato-head to lay the turnaround all on Dean Smith. Bruce brought in the likes of Hourihane and McGinn, he sorted out the dressing mess, and got us organised and competing for promotion (**** up by decimating our defense before he got sacked). Plus it's down to Bruce that Terry became associated with our club. I don't like the football we played, I hated they way he spoke about the fans, but he has to take half the credit for turning things around as he stabilised the club, and in hindsight was the right man at the right time for the club, as Smith is now.

Not sure about half the credit, but he does deserve some.

However, I think we are in much more progressive hands now.

[TRO]

10 hours ago, Villan4Life said:

73 year old Scout Stan Ternant (ex Burnley, Hull, Bury and other clubs Manager) recommended Andy Robertson to Bruce whilst he was at Hull and Bruce signed him. Stan also recommended John McGinn to Bruce which who he signed for Villa.

Bruce trusted Ternant's recommendations and are they are also good friends.

I think Bruce has many friends in football, which has served him well, particularly in terms of recruitment.

Dean has also presided over many good signings at Brentford too.....its a tough call to say,how much influence either manager had in their signings.

I think Dean is more of a student of the game and is far more flexible and diverse in his thinking about the technical aspects.

I am still expecting to see subtle changes to things as the season progresses and the slight improvements in certain things too.

[TRO]

10 hours ago, tomav84 said:

FML it's been over a year since we got rid of him, the dust has settled, and we're better off. yet we still cannot possibly bear to give him any credit?!

he bought those players in on his own. he had no scouts, no DOF. he did the mcginn deal, the tammy deal, and the terry deal the year prior, on his own.

back on topic, i love smith...i'm so pleased we have him...but he couldn't have done what bruce did that summer on his own

Dean has always been very generous in his praise of Bruce......That is good enough for me.

 

[Philosopher]

How I see it is Bruce plugged the holes in the ship and got it a float again, and Dean unfurled the sails and set it sail towards the promised land.

[tomav84]

17 minutes ago, Philosopher said:

How I see it is Bruce plugged the holes in the ship and got it a float again, and Dean unfurled the sails and set it sail towards the promised land.

i dont think there's a more perfect way of describing the roles of bruce and smith in our promotion season

[Tomaszk]

1 hour ago, Philosopher said:

How I see it is Bruce plugged the holes in the ship and got it a float again, and Dean unfurled the sails and set it sail towards the promised land.

It's a lovely analogy.

Gives Bruce far too much credit though.

He left us the same way he came in: in a battle to finish top half of the Championship. Remember the fixtures Smith had to face when he first came in? Bruce had played the entire bottom half and we we had scraped three wins. Before the 10 in a row, the early wins Smith picked up were an astonishing turnaround.

Edited October 18, 2019 by Tomaszk

[TRO]

33 minutes ago, Tomaszk said:

It's a lovely analogy.

Gives Bruce far too much credit though.

He left us the same way he came in: in a battle to finish top half of the Championship. Remember the fixtures Smith had to face when he first came in? Bruce had played the entire bottom half and we we had scraped three wins. Before the 10 in a row, the early wins Smith picked up were an astonishing turnaround.

The first 11 games was  before Dean took over was poor no doubt about it, but it is hard to dismiss what happened in the summer and the personal effects of his family grief.

Personally, I choose to remember, as the philosopher so eloquently explains ....The plugging of the ships holes......Now Dean can set sail.

[praisedmambo]

1 hour ago, Philosopher said:

How I see it is Bruce plugged the holes in the ship and got it a float again, and Dean unfurled the sails and set it sail towards the promised land.

This gives Bruce too much credit. He left us with massive holes, one of which James Chester had to fix to the detriment of his health as a footballer. I might have agreed with this analogy had Bruce left at the end of his second season, but ultimately he left us unbalanced and in a mess. Dean Smith worked wonders.

[Tomaszk]

2 minutes ago, TRO said:

The first 11 games was  before Dean took over was poor no doubt about it, but it is hard to dismiss what happened in the summer and the personal effects of his family grief.

Personally, I choose to remember, as the philosopher so eloquently explains ....The plugging of the ships holes......Now Dean can set sail.

We probably had about 10 good games in the 100 Bruce managed. That's it. Absolutely useless "manager".

Bruce was a stable boy used to shovelling muck who somehow found himself on the back of thoroughbred. The poor horse managed to battle to some wins despite being steered through every hedge and jump on the course. Luckily he fell off into a ditch and we could get a real jockey in. Now we're up in the group 1s competing again.

[Philosopher]

51 minutes ago, Tomaszk said:

It's a lovely analogy.

Gives Bruce far too much credit though.

He left us the same way he came in: in a battle to finish top half of the Championship. Remember the fixtures Smith had to face when he first came in? Bruce had played the entire bottom half and we we had scraped three wins. Before the 10 in a row, the early wins Smith picked up were an astonishing turnaround.

The foundation was there we had the re-build the central defense that was it. Smith also lost or draw with a bunch of the lower clubs. That January and February was abysmal. Bruce deserves some credit. He did nearly throw away his good work. That fact is he was the right appointment at the time, a d he was sacked at the right time. Bruce isn't terrible just antiquated. He also had health problems and lost his parents. 

[MaVilla]

14 minutes ago, praisedmambo said:

This gives Bruce too much credit. He left us with massive holes, one of which James Chester had to fix to the detriment of his health as a footballer. I might have agreed with this analogy had Bruce left at the end of his second season, but ultimately he left us unbalanced and in a mess. Dean Smith worked wonders.

Ok

The ship had two masts and a big hole in the hull.

Bruce plugged the hole but chopped down one of the masts to plug the hole.

Deano took over the remnants of the boat, and amazingly managed to set sail to the promised land with one mast, which made it even more remarkable?

???

Edited October 18, 2019 by MaVilla

[Tomaszk]

6 minutes ago, MaVilla said:

Ok

The ship had two masts and a big hole in the hull.

Bruce plugged the hole but chopped down one of the masts to plug the hole.

Deano took over the remnants of the boat, and amazingly managed to set sail to the promised land with one mast, which made it even more remarkable?

???

Bruce was the chef and the only man who knew how to cook when he got on board.

Then he gave food poisoning to everyone because he insisted on giving them raw meat and boiled potatoes. Plus he left the stove on, the ship caught fire and was burning down.

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

23 hours ago, tomav84 said:

FML it's been over a year since we got rid of him, the dust has settled, and we're better off. yet we still cannot possibly bear to give him any credit?!

he bought those players in on his own. he had no scouts, no DOF. he did the mcginn deal, the tammy deal, and the terry deal the year prior, on his own.

back on topic, i love smith...i'm so pleased we have him...but he couldn't have done what bruce did that summer on his own

Whoa everybody calm down...

1. I've never been one to not give credit where it's due, my post record shows that. I'm actually wanted him to succeed.

2. It was a genuine question 

3. I don't actually "Hate" Bruce, that was tongue in cheek, I'm just bitter at how he used to talk about us at points, and the excuses 

4. Is it unheard of for managers to inherit players they have not necessarily "signed"? You do know at some clubs, the actual scouting team can have identified players they wanted to bring in, and a sudden change of manager would not affect that. Remember Bruce came in at an awkward point in the season. I was just wondering if perhaps those players were already in the pipeline, and Bruce "ok'd" them. That is all.

Edited October 18, 2019 by JAMAICAN-VILLAN