hypothetical question new manager

Thank Christ you’re not involved in the decision-making process then.[/quote]
I seem to remember a against all odds relegation escape and the 2nd best ever points tally in a EPL season under these two.
I suppose its because the dont wear tanned shoes eh? :)[/quote]

No, it’s because he nearly bankrupted the club when he was here and is the reason why Martinez has had nothing to spend for three years.

Oh, and he plays the dullest, most neck-wrenching football, in Christendom.

Thank Christ you’re not involved in the decision-making process then.[/quote]
I seem to remember a against all odds relegation escape and the 2nd best ever points tally in a EPL season under these two.
I suppose its because the dont wear tanned shoes eh? :)[/quote]

No, it’s because he nearly bankrupted the club when he was here and is the reason why Martinez has had nothing to spend for three years.

Oh, and he plays the dullest, most neck-wrenching football, in Christendom.[/quote]

It’s funny how we all watch the same game and yet we all see different things and have differing views. My memory of Bruces team was of Valencia and Palacios and the rest of the team playing some great stuff, yes we did have Heskey up front but we certainly weren’t IMO a kick and rush team.[/quote]

You keep your memories, I’ll keep mine.

Griff – If there’s one thing from reading your posts on here that I didn’t think you were, it’s naive but I think that first comment above is incredibly naive ;)

Steve Bruce is not the reason why Martinez has had “nothing to spend” (although the fact that it is a Martinez signing which is the club’s record transfer fee kind of indicates that he has hardly had nothing to spend!!).
The reason why I think it’s naive to say it’s Bruce’s fault is that Whelan keeps an iron grip on the budgets & spending within his businesses & I doubt that Latics are any different. If you think Steve Bruce spent money on players & their wages without first having had those spends authorised by the big fella then you’re living in cloud cuckoo land.
The point being that every manager under Whelan has operated under the budgets allowed to them by him – the fact of the matter is that for reasons I completely understand (although I’ll never agree with the timing of them) Whelan decided that the club could no longer continue along those lines & that they needed to move towards making the club self-sufficient. If Bruce had stayed he would have had to operate under the same budget as Bobby has. What’s more, there were plenty of players at the club on massive wages when Bobby arrived who weren’t signed by Bruce (Koumas, Kirkland, Bramble etc..).
The reason Bobby has had “nothing to spend” ;) is because of Dave Whelan not Steve Bruce or any other Latics manager[/quote]

OK, let me re-phrase it to appear less naive.

Under Bruce (agreed with Whelan’s blessing) we spent a fortune on wages (not mynopinion, facts) and achieved rag all other than the dizzy heights of 11th (?, I think) and them dropped like a stone after Christmas.

Probably feeling a bit relieved that we got away with that profligate spending without achieving anything of note, Whelan tightened the purse strings under Bobby. Therefore, Bobby is suffering from what Bruce spent, whichever way you choose it look at it.

Bruce can’t manage a football team without throwing money at it. As he is unlikely to have that option here, I doubt he will be offered, nor would he accept, the position.

That’s better ;)
Although Latics were 7th, pushing for Europe & going great guns under Steve Bruce when Dave Whelan decided to tighten the purse strings (prior to Bobby arriving). They “dropped like a stone after Xmas” to 11th – in no small part due to Dave Whelan deciding to break that team up in mid-season against the wishes of his manager. Now I’m not gonna argue that results & performances were much kop from 1st Feb onwards but I think given the fact that the chairman had told everybody that their job for the season was done & an ambitious manager had had his team broken up against his wishes & told in no uncertain terms that his job was to keep us up & that is it I think the tailing off in form was understandable. Of an employees motivation goes their productivity drops.
Bobby is suffering because of what Dave Whelan allowed his previous managers to spend (John Deehan, Ray Mathias, Bruce Rioch, Paul Jewell, Chris Hutchings & Steve Bruce) & not purely because of what bruce spent – as I mentioned 3 of the club’s biggest earners were not even bruce signings
As for whether Bruce can manage a team without throwing money at it – well the Sunderlan fans would argue that he can’t do that, but the only time he was in charge of Latics & was unable to spend he turned the shambles of Chris Hutchings side round in the space of 2 weeks.
By the way, I’m not saying I want Bruce back just that I think you do him a big dis-service, just as i & many others have done the same to Bobby over the last 3 seasons

I know how much he spent too. The point I was making was that he spent it with Whelan’s blessing so he is not to blame in any way for Martinez’s reduced budget (in comparison to that if his predecessors). he may have spent big (in comparison to Bobby) but he also got us challenging for Europe & I believe he’d have got us to the spot that Fulham were able to get that year if he’d been allowed to keep his team together.
I liked Bruce’s style of play as you know – when it clicked it was a joy to watch (IMO). When it didn’t work it was dire but I enjoyed watching them try to make it work ;) . Similarly, when Bobby’s style has clicked it’s great (even prior to our recent run) when it hasn’t, its been awful

That said, I wouldn’t want him back

Quiet please Phil, the grown-ups are talking

IF Bob goes then I think we need another Spanish Manager. The style we play now is very Spanish orientated and as it finally looks like the players have grasped it, I want to see it continue.