Bruce out?

[Toronto Villa]

Bruce has shown the ability to get promoted from this division with far less talent. So I have confidence next season we will be promoted. After that I feel he'll have to be replaced, but lets get there first.

[Mister E]

The key challenge is: who would come in as a credible and progressive replacement?
I could not list many are (i) up to the job, (ii) willing to come here and, (iii) available.
Wyness will wait untl the close-season and see who may become available. A change then may be possible.

[Rudy Can't Fail]

Wyness will wait untl the close-season and see who may become available. A change then may be possible.

Bruce was a Wyness appointment, so for that reason I can see him sticking with him. Xia on the other hand..

[paul_e]

Explain to me how we have had continuity for ages when we Bruce is our 7th manager since September 2010 and our 4th since February 2015?

That is a shocking statistic, it does not however justify retaining a manager that is not up to the job.

It is a shocking statistic but, and this bit is important, is that the cause of us being where where we are or the consequence?  If you believe it's the root cause then you may have a case for calling for Bruce to be given more time.  However you run the risk of at least contradicting yourself (if not being an outright hypocrite) if you called for the sacking of any of McLeish, Sherwood, Garde or RDM.  In between those you have Lambert who, whilst not helped by the owner, managed to make us progressively worse and stands as a perfect example of the folly of thinking that giving a manager who's not reaching his targets more time will somehow lead to things getting better.

I'm all for consistency but I think you can only have it if you know where you want to be and everything you do is a step in that direction.  Trying to take a shortcut as we did by going for Bruce is far riskier in my opinion.

[itbrvilla]

The twists and turns and the name changes in this thread just go to demonstrate just show how short term the average modern football fan thinking is. This club has lacked stability for so long it is has become the accepted approach for some.

Having to go through another recruitment process and then the unavoidable consequence of having to adapt of another change of training methods and playing style would see us once again going into the season on the back foot. If we want to get promoted next season logic says it will be best achieved by sticking with a man with a proven track record of doing just that and who the players already know. There are no guarantees in sport but change just adds further uncertainty.

My thoughts exactly. A bit of continuity for a change might do us good.

And I am sure some have changed their minds as we cobbled together some results but there are a good few also that knew what would happen when we appointed him

So for the sake of continuity do we continue with a brand of football that is at best dull to watch and at worst the most bizarre and negative tactics ever. Add into the fact the past history of Bruce and his methods (or lack of them) and I fear nothing will change.

The only continuity we have is us being shit  - it has to stop

Spot on. We've had continuity for ages and I'm sick of it.

Explain to me how we have had continuity for ages when we Bruce is our 7th manager since September 2010 and our 4th since February 2015?

Continuity of perpetual shitness. Keeping a clown for continuities sake is frankly ridiculous

[Clampy]

The twists and turns and the name changes in this thread just go to demonstrate just show how short term the average modern football fan thinking is. This club has lacked stability for so long it is has become the accepted approach for some.

Having to go through another recruitment process and then the unavoidable consequence of having to adapt of another change of training methods and playing style would see us once again going into the season on the back foot. If we want to get promoted next season logic says it will be best achieved by sticking with a man with a proven track record of doing just that and who the players already know. There are no guarantees in sport but change just adds further uncertainty.

My thoughts exactly. A bit of continuity for a change might do us good.

And I am sure some have changed their minds as we cobbled together some results but there are a good few also that knew what would happen when we appointed him

So for the sake of continuity do we continue with a brand of football that is at best dull to watch and at worst the most bizarre and negative tactics ever. Add into the fact the past history of Bruce and his methods (or lack of them) and I fear nothing will change.

The only continuity we have is us being shit  - it has to stop

Spot on. We've had continuity for ages and I'm sick of it.

Explain to me how we have had continuity for ages when we Bruce is our 7th manager since September 2010 and our 4th since February 2015?

Continuity of perpetual shitness. Keeping a clown for continuities sake is frankly ridiculous

Why is Bruce a clown?

[itbrvilla]

Considering Wyness and Round are football men I've been rather unimpressed with their input to the team.  Poor expensive signing on high contracts. Reminds me of MONs time here.  No forethought and planning, more monied kid in a toy shop.  Irresponsible on their part, but Bruce has been very poor.

[supertom]

We need to do what Newcastle have done and show a bit of ambition in appointing a manager. Or the alternative is to find someone young and inspired who can push us on. That is very difficult because they want all be Wagner or Howe say.

But lets face it, if someone like Benitez goes to a club like Newcastle in the mess they've been in, then money could get us a big name manager who could actually help us develop. Bruce is a pragmatic choice, but uninspired, and whilst he's done it at lower clubs, I don't think he can do much here. I struggle to see any sort of footballing ethos he can instil, besides negative football and grinding results. Granted you need that, but by his own admission, that's his forte. Yes you need to win ugly, but sometimes you need to impose yourself and show some class on the pitch. Winning pretty is also important. Sometimes guts isn't enough and you need the quality to come through.

We spend so much on average players? Why not spend big on a good manager?

[Clampy]

Considering Wyness and Round are football men I've been rather unimpressed with their input to the team.  Poor expensive signing on high contracts. Reminds me of MONs time here.  No forethought and planning, more monied kid in a toy shop.  Irresponsible on their part, but Bruce has been very poor.

Wyness and Round are just bringing in the players who the manager wants. That's how it should work.

[itbrvilla]

Considering Wyness and Round are football men I've been rather unimpressed with their input to the team.  Poor expensive signing on high contracts. Reminds me of MONs time here.  No forethought and planning, more monied kid in a toy shop.  Irresponsible on their part, but Bruce has been very poor.

Wyness and Round are just bringing in the players who the manager wants. That's how it should work.

So Bruce is getting player in that don't fit his system or plays them in positions that they previously didn't?
Surely Rounds role is to provide continuity and identity, and Wyness is to manage the purse strings.

[Clampy]

Considering Wyness and Round are football men I've been rather unimpressed with their input to the team.  Poor expensive signing on high contracts. Reminds me of MONs time here.  No forethought and planning, more monied kid in a toy shop.  Irresponsible on their part, but Bruce has been very poor.

Wyness and Round are just bringing in the players who the manager wants. That's how it should work.

So Bruce is getting player in that don't fit his system or plays them in positions that they previously didn't?
Surely Rounds role is to provide continuity and identity, and Wyness is to manage the purse strings.

So you're suggesting Round and Wyness should have said no to Bruce's and RDM's signings?

[Dave]

Considering Wyness and Round are football men I've been rather unimpressed with their input to the team.  Poor expensive signing on high contracts. Reminds me of MONs time here.  No forethought and planning, more monied kid in a toy shop.  Irresponsible on their part, but Bruce has been very poor.

Wyness and Round are just bringing in the players who the manager wants. That's how it should work.

I'm not sure that's a definitive fact. If Bruce is gone at some point in the next year or so then it means we are back to square one with another manager having to bring in all "his own players" all over again.

[itbrvilla]

Considering Wyness and Round are football men I've been rather unimpressed with their input to the team.  Poor expensive signing on high contracts. Reminds me of MONs time here.  No forethought and planning, more monied kid in a toy shop.  Irresponsible on their part, but Bruce has been very poor.

Wyness and Round are just bringing in the players who the manager wants. That's how it should work.

So Bruce is getting player in that don't fit his system or plays them in positions that they previously didn't?
Surely Rounds role is to provide continuity and identity, and Wyness is to manage the purse strings.

So you're suggesting Round and Wyness should have said no to Bruce's and RDM's signings?

I don't think they were all their signings

[Clampy]

Considering Wyness and Round are football men I've been rather unimpressed with their input to the team.  Poor expensive signing on high contracts. Reminds me of MONs time here.  No forethought and planning, more monied kid in a toy shop.  Irresponsible on their part, but Bruce has been very poor.

Wyness and Round are just bringing in the players who the manager wants. That's how it should work.

So Bruce is getting player in that don't fit his system or plays them in positions that they previously didn't?
Surely Rounds role is to provide continuity and identity, and Wyness is to manage the purse strings.

So you're suggesting Round and Wyness should have said no to Bruce's and RDM's signings?

I don't think they were all their signings

Out of interest, who's signings do you think they were?

[itbrvilla]

Round's. Is that a really outrageous suggestion, considering your condescending tone?