Bruce Sacked at last (now official)

[DB]

That last sentence is the best summary so far.

Changing a dinosaur is not changing for the sake of it.  It is changing for the sake (and good) of Aston Villa.

If we can change him in 2 months time, we can change him now.  If we want to write this season off with a change of manager in September (like we did 2 years ago) why not write it off now and give the next manager more time and also the remainder of this window?

Fair enough, but who would imprive us? Not asking to provoke but just want to hear who we could get to get better

[GarTomas]

That last sentence is the best summary so far.

Changing a dinosaur is not changing for the sake of it.  It is changing for the sake (and good) of Aston Villa.

If we can change him in 2 months time, we can change him now.  If we want to write this season off with a change of manager in September (like we did 2 years ago) why not write it off now and give the next manager more time and also the remainder of this window?

The issue is, who picks the replacement today? In 2-3 months I suspect the board will be in place and that question is much easier to answer.  I want Bruce gone (I think everyone on here must be aware of that) but I want the next manager to be the right manager rather than 'not Bruce'. Bruce, like Lambert, RDM, Sherwood and McLeish, is a consequence of the board having no idea how to achieve it's aims and my concern was that we could be repeating that mistake.  As I said about Henry if he was a recommendation from someone who is in talks to join the board and they decided not getting him in asap was a risk then I was ok with it, but if, as it seems, that's not the case then I'd rather we wait for a few months.

All fair and agree with the assessment around the new owners not knowing who to appoint now, and knowing and realising that is a massive plus for me about them as owners.

Had the investment occurred 6 weeks ago I’m sure they would of made the change.

Harsh to throw the Lambert appointment in with that lot as it was generally seen as a progressive one at the time.

[Taylor]

When Tony Barton took over as caretaker he was strong enough to leave well alone the things that didn't need fixing immediately rather than changing just for the sake of showing that he was in charge.

The situation is similar now. We may need a new manager in two months time but by then we should have a structure in place that will be able to choose the right man, rather than trusting to luck and blind faith.

I'm not sure the situation is similar Dave.

Barton took over a team who were in the quarter final of the European Cup - It would have been difficult to change things, even if he had the ability to do so.

The situation we are in currently is that we are going into a new season with a manager who nobody has faith in him breaching the top 2 positions.

Barton stepped in because there was a need for stability at a crucial point of the season. Yes, stability helps now but at what cost?

Speak for yourself. It is astounding that people think they can predict what every other fan is thinking.

[paul_e]

That last sentence is the best summary so far.

Changing a dinosaur is not changing for the sake of it.  It is changing for the sake (and good) of Aston Villa.

If we can change him in 2 months time, we can change him now.  If we want to write this season off with a change of manager in September (like we did 2 years ago) why not write it off now and give the next manager more time and also the remainder of this window?

The issue is, who picks the replacement today? In 2-3 months I suspect the board will be in place and that question is much easier to answer.  I want Bruce gone (I think everyone on here must be aware of that) but I want the next manager to be the right manager rather than 'not Bruce'. Bruce, like Lambert, RDM, Sherwood and McLeish, is a consequence of the board having no idea how to achieve it's aims and my concern was that we could be repeating that mistake.  As I said about Henry if he was a recommendation from someone who is in talks to join the board and they decided not getting him in asap was a risk then I was ok with it, but if, as it seems, that's not the case then I'd rather we wait for a few months.

All fair and agree with the assessment around the new owners not knowing who to appoint now, and knowing and realising that is a massive plus for me about them as owners.

Had the investment occurred 6 weeks ago I’m sure they would of made the change.

Harsh to throw the Lambert appointment in with that lot as it was generally seen as a progressive one at the time.

Lambert's there for 2 reasons, 1 is that they kept him in position for about a year too long and 2 is that there was clearly no strategy above him which is why we had young and hungry and then had a breakdown, signed Senderos, Richardson and Cole and gave new contracts to Hutton and Gabby because they'd played about 4 games.

[Comrade Blitz]

The name of this thread could be changed to "I wanted Bruce out too but...."

[Risso]

I think our new investors have amassed their wealth by taking a long term balanced view rather that by taking a short term knee jerk short term view.

Be honest, you’d never heard of them before last week and have no idea how they amassed their wealth.

[chrisw1]

I think our new investors have amassed their wealth by taking a long term balanced view rather that by taking a short term knee jerk short term view.

Be honest, you’d never heard of them before last week and have no idea how they amassed their wealth.

I suspect he's making an educated guess and to be fair I think he's on pretty safe ground.  Short term knee jerk short term views don't tend to be great business practice.

[Risso]

Most billionaires have taken chances and not the safe predictable option.

[Damo70]

Most billionaires have taken chances and not the safe predictable option.

True, but I would imagine that they have weighed up when to take chances and when to play it safe.

[PaulWinch again]

There’s taking a chance and being wreckless. Bruce is very lucky to be here, but given the timing I understand why they would to actually assess what they want to do behind the scenes before changing the manager.

[Steve67]

There’s taking a chance and being wreckless. Bruce is very lucky to be here, but given the timing I understand why they would to actually assess what they want to do behind the scenes before changing the manager.

I think we will soon see.  If he can only bring in loans and frees, then I think they are hedging their bets on Bruce and are already planning ahead.  If they give him proper support, money etc, then I reckon we are keeping him.  'Full support' for me, doesn't mean loans, it means bringing in players of quality, with money spent.

[PaulWinch again]

I don’t think the necessarily do fully support him. I just think timing has dictated a pragmatic solution.

[Drummond]

Most billionaires have taken chances and not the safe predictable option.

And you've studied enough of them to know have you?

So why do you think they have stuck with Bruce?

Bruce is safe if not exciting. It would be ridiculous for the new owners to bring someone different in, given that they have no experience in this industry.

Those who want Bruce out now, don't seem to be in the majority of Villa fans. The players clearly like the guy, and. By all accounts Chester wants Bruce to stay and likes him a lot.

If it doesn't work, then get rid, but by that time we should have a CEO etc in place.

[Brassneck]

When Tony Barton took over as caretaker he was strong enough to leave well alone the things that didn't need fixing immediately rather than changing just for the sake of showing that he was in charge.

The situation is similar now. We may need a new manager in two months time but by then we should have a structure in place that will be able to choose the right man, rather than trusting to luck and blind faith.

I'm not sure the situation is similar Dave.

Barton took over a team who were in the quarter final of the European Cup - It would have been difficult to change things, even if he had the ability to do so.

The situation we are in currently is that we are going into a new season with a manager who nobody has faith in him breaching the top 2 positions.

Barton stepped in because there was a need for stability at a crucial point of the season. Yes, stability helps now but at what cost?

Speak for yourself. It is astounding that people think they can predict what every other fan is thinking.

If you re-read the thread, you will see that NOBODY has faith in Bruce.  If you do have faith, then you are in a very tiny minority.  I find it astounding that, after the rubbish of the past 2 seasons that anybody would have faith in Bruce.

[Brassneck]

That last sentence is the best summary so far.

Changing a dinosaur is not changing for the sake of it.  It is changing for the sake (and good) of Aston Villa.

If we can change him in 2 months time, we can change him now.  If we want to write this season off with a change of manager in September (like we did 2 years ago) why not write it off now and give the next manager more time and also the remainder of this window?

The issue is, who picks the replacement today? In 2-3 months I suspect the board will be in place and that question is much easier to answer.  I want Bruce gone (I think everyone on here must be aware of that) but I want the next manager to be the right manager rather than 'not Bruce'. Bruce, like Lambert, RDM, Sherwood and McLeish, is a consequence of the board having no idea how to achieve it's aims and my concern was that we could be repeating that mistake.  As I said about Henry if he was a recommendation from someone who is in talks to join the board and they decided not getting him in asap was a risk then I was ok with it, but if, as it seems, that's not the case then I'd rather we wait for a few months.

Half of this forum have picked the new manager.  What qualifies them to do so ahead of a board member?  Furthermore, how would a board member know something in 2 months that they don't know now?  Would they have a better understanding in 2 months time of Dean Smith? Henry? or whoever? Would they know in 2 months time that Bruce won't get us there or would they base the decision on 10/12 games?

We all want the next manager to be the right one.  Waiting 2 months will not advance that ability to pick the right one any further forward.