Just said: The difference between Barmby and Bruce was...... Barmby knew what he wanted to do/how he wanted it played, but didn't have the players to do it. Bruce - with more experience - looked at what he'd got to work with, and what we see is the result.
Just heard it and thought "this is the first time I totally agree with him" But then the thought occured to me that Bruce actually has a different squad compared to Barmby.
Bruce is currently only playing 2 of Barmby's regular first 11 and that seems to make a difference, only Chester and Koren are first choice with everyone else either gone, bench or 'squad' players.
But you can also look at it and say he's using 2 of Barmby's team, plus Dudgeon, Oli, and Simpson that were available to Barmby but left on the sidelines.
SB talks real sense and with a smile - total contrast to NP in particular. TBH I think even he's surprised how well we are doing and with so much style.
I aren't surprised - I work with a Latics ST holder, he told me Bruce was 'almost mercurial' in managing a really good start to a season.
It always seemed his teams were flying up until Christmas, but then with nothing to play for they'd drop off a bit in the second half of the season. If we keep this up all season though we'll piss this league.
Fully agree, and that's kind of one half of my point 3 players who didn't really get a look in playing really well, the rest Bruce has brought in and they have made a big difference
Not an entirely fair comparison, one was given £3m, allowed to make six permanent signings and two loans, the other was just allowed the two loans. No doubt Brucey has done well with his signings though.
Think it is fair it's going on the way they've approached it, Bruce is playing a formation to suit the players, Barmby played his formation regardless when there were possibly different formations that could have better suited what we had last season. It's got sod all to do with who's been able to spend what and bring who in.
Simply not true, the 3-5-2 didn't really work until we signed Elmo and Quinn, he brought in players to suit the system that he wanted to play and it's now paying dividends.
There are arguments for and against Barmby and his formation choice/lack of funds. There is no denying that Fryatt should not have been playing up front on his own. Simpson was available to barmby but Nick couldn't get the best out of him (firstly because he refused to play Jay)
Having not been given the funds he wanted, I agree that Nick should have changed the formation to suit the players he did have.
