Bruce Sacked at last (now official)

[cheltenhamlion]

How are they in a position to make a sensible decision before the season starts and before the window closes? If this had happened two months ago I would have got rid. There simply isn’t time to do it now, and make the necessary changes to make it work.

Don't agree. I'd rather have the problems now than keep a manager who's waiting for the axe to fall. It's a straightforward decision to make if you rate the manager. If they do, then i'm not happy but at least it sets our stall out for the next season or so.. How the hell can you plan long term if you're not convinced by the manager?

Well I’d imagine they’re thinking that Bruce can keep us in promotion contention, with some investment in the playing squad, so they’re taking a pragmatic approach. Long-term planning only really matters once we’ve got promoted, anything up to that point is a short one year plan.

I’m not saying I think Bruce deserves the job, but in the circumstances I can see why the decision is sensible.

Totally disagree
Long term planning should start now no matter what division we are in

We haven't got £7m to change it right now.

[cheltenhamlion]

Bruce isn't getting potted and we aren't bringing in Henry. People need to understand that we aren't going gung ho (He) with a spending splurge.

What about Ho (He) - will he hang around?

No. The work experience has finished.

[Chinchilla Bathhouse]

The next manager has got to be someone who can build a club, not just pick a team. If we have to tolerate a few more months of Bruceball while the new owners scout and land exactly the right man then I can live with that.

I want to see some sane, long-term planning, rather than rushed decisions. I want to see that our new owners are different. Unless the right man is available right now I see no value at all in binning off Bruce for the sake of it. That's the sort of decision-making that leads to appointing someone like, well, Bruce.  We need him to mind the shop while we look for a real football manager.

And I say all that as someone who'd have sacked the excuse-making oaf for finishing 13th.

[sickbeggar]

How are they in a position to make a sensible decision before the season starts and before the window closes? If this had happened two months ago I would have got rid. There simply isn’t time to do it now, and make the necessary changes to make it work.

Don't agree. I'd rather have the problems now than keep a manager who's waiting for the axe to fall. It's a straightforward decision to make if you rate the manager. If they do, then i'm not happy but at least it sets our stall out for the next season or so.. How the hell can you plan long term if you're not convinced by the manager?

Well I’d imagine they’re thinking that Bruce can keep us in promotion contention, with some investment in the playing squad, so they’re taking a pragmatic approach. Long-term planning only really matters once we’ve got promoted, anything up to that point is a short one year plan.

I’m not saying I think Bruce deserves the job, but in the circumstances I can see why the decision is sensible.

Totally disagree
Long term planning should start now no matter what division we are in

We haven't got £7m to change it right now.

and we have in December?

[Zouch Villa]

The next manager has got to be someone who can build a club, not just pick a team. If we have to tolerate a few more months of Bruceball while the new owners scout and land exactly the right man then I can live with that.

I want to see some sane, long-term planning, rather than rushed decisions. I want to see that our new owners are different. Unless the right man is available right now I see no value at all in binning off Bruce for the sake of it. That's the sort of decision-making that leads to appointing someone like, well, Bruce.  We need him to mind the shop while we look for a real football manager.

And I say all that as someone who'd have sacked the excuse-making oaf for finishing 13th.

Yep, pretty much agree with all of that.  As much as I’d love to see a new broom get rid of Bruce in favour of someone that wants to build bottom up, it’s not realistic to assume they have anyone lined up in the wings ready to bring in.

Bruce is an experienced manager, and has shown he can be effective in this league, so it’s not unreasonable to give him the chance (albeit under a clear remit not to sign journeymen), whilst they new bods focus on sorting other matters out.

[robleflaneur]

I'm in the Bruce out camp but I also believe that you don't sack a manager without a viable alternative.
If there is a suitable affordable candidate,then this is a good time to get rid as there is a need to get the best out of the current squad,especially developing younger players.This  requires better coaching and tactical awareness than seen under Bruce's regime,rather than bringing in experienced players which is Bruce's forte .

[sickbeggar]

Keeping a manager on the basis its cheaper than sacking him is total mentalism. Say for arguement's sake, Bruce has got us to 6th in december. Then we lose a key player and he wants to bring in a loan player. Do we want a board who don't really fancy him deciding whether he get's that player? I don't. Back him or sack him.

[auntiesledd]

Bruce isn't getting potted and we aren't bringing in Henry. People need to understand that we aren't going gung ho (He) with a spending splurge.

What about Ho (He) - will he hang around?

No. The work experience has finished.

Blimey. I was half expecting Ho/He to be given the heave ho.

[Allan C]

How are they in a position to make a sensible decision before the season starts and before the window closes? If this had happened two months ago I would have got rid. There simply isn’t time to do it now, and make the necessary changes to make it work.

Don't agree. I'd rather have the problems now than keep a manager who's waiting for the axe to fall. It's a straightforward decision to make if you rate the manager. If they do, then i'm not happy but at least it sets our stall out for the next season or so.. How the hell can you plan long term if you're not convinced by the manager?

Well I’d imagine they’re thinking that Bruce can keep us in promotion contention, with some investment in the playing squad, so they’re taking a pragmatic approach. Long-term planning only really matters once we’ve got promoted, anything up to that point is a short one year plan.

I’m not saying I think Bruce deserves the job, but in the circumstances I can see why the decision is sensible.

Totally disagree
Long term planning should start now no matter what division we are in

Absolutely 100% this  this is the chance to start afresh and rebuild properly. Let’s do it

[cheltenhamlion]

Keeping a manager on the basis its cheaper than sacking him is total mentalism. Say for arguement's sake, Bruce has got us to 6th in december. Then we lose a key player and he wants to bring in a loan player. Do we want a board who don't really fancy him deciding whether he get's that player? I don't. Back him or sack him.

Who says they don't fancy him? He just has very clear objectives and will get hoofed out if he doesn't achieve them.

[PeterWithesShin]

So the odds must be decent that Bruce won't finish the season as manager. We can't afford to bin him now but we'll be able to in a few months if he's failing. And we'll spend X millions in fees and wages on Bruce players despite the odds being high that he won't be the manager within a year. Not the greatest master plan i've ever seen.

[sickbeggar]

So the odds must be decent that Bruce won't finish the season as manager. We can't afford to bin him now but we'll be able to in a few months if he's failing. And we'll spend X millions in fees and wages on Bruce players despite the odds being high that he won't be the manager within a year. Not the greatest master plan i've ever seen.

*ding*

[sickbeggar]

Keeping a manager on the basis its cheaper than sacking him is total mentalism. Say for arguement's sake, Bruce has got us to 6th in december. Then we lose a key player and he wants to bring in a loan player. Do we want a board who don't really fancy him deciding whether he get's that player? I don't. Back him or sack him.

Who says they don't fancy him? He just has very clear objectives and will get hoofed out if he doesn't achieve them.

what are these objectives though? the same as last season on a shoestring? If that's the case then i suggest they don't fancy him.

[cheltenhamlion]

So the odds must be decent that Bruce won't finish the season as manager. We can't afford to bin him now but we'll be able to in a few months if he's failing. And we'll spend X millions in fees and wages on Bruce players despite the odds being high that he won't be the manager within a year. Not the greatest master plan i've ever seen.

For now we need to use our disposable income on acquiring players to give us a chance of promotion. If it goes to shit, we change, we take stock with the new guy who will have a lesser budget but time to mould it for promotion in 18 months time. It doesn't seem that daft to me.

[cheltenhamlion]

Keeping a manager on the basis its cheaper than sacking him is total mentalism. Say for arguement's sake, Bruce has got us to 6th in december. Then we lose a key player and he wants to bring in a loan player. Do we want a board who don't really fancy him deciding whether he get's that player? I don't. Back him or sack him.

Who says they don't fancy him? He just has very clear objectives and will get hoofed out if he doesn't achieve them.

what are these objectives though? the same as last season on a shoestring? If that's the case then i suggest they don't fancy him.

We can't spend a bucket load of cash even if they wanted to so I don't understand how having less money to spend must mean they don't rate the manager.