Fernandes Vs De Bruyne

[Cassidy]

It’s an impossible debate really, Bruno would look twice as good with mental figures in that city side while debruyne wouldn't look amazing in the United team the last few years.

Bruno was a goal and assist machine despite being surrounded by dross wiry shit managers with traffic cones to aim at:

You started the post with 2 large assumptions which are not based in fact or supported by evidence

 

[Abraxas]

De Bruyne is slightly overrated, but only because people go overboard as they often do with current players. There is always that inclination to be the one making a big claim.

Greatest PL midfielder ever and such is just nonsense in my opinion. There have been some pretty good mids and they didn't all play in a Pep machine. Why's he better than Gerrard if we want to start with attacking mids? One has every conceivable opportunity to excel, the other was regularly feeding the likes of Voronin and it's still clear who was influential between the two. De Bruyne isn't irreplaceable for Pep, make no mistake - he's just very nice to have.

But he's still bloody good, whereas with Bruno you do have to let a fair amount go in exchange for raw numbers. When he's having his off games it badly impacts the team. Partly because we're so reliant and partly because of his style. De Bruyne has a more solid base level.

 

[Ekeke]

I think De Bruyne is better in overall quality and more consistent at least for his club side, maybe he's not as good for his national team. But Fernandes when he is on it has huge end product. When he's off his game he can be a bit frustrating, but when things are going right for him he can do it all in terms of winning the match for you with goals and assists. I can certainly see why they are compared due to where they play on the pitch but they have quite different styles where essentialy Bruno just cares about the result - the scoreline. Is he and are his teammates in the goals. While De Bruyne cares a lot more about the process, keeping the ball, always trying to make the right choice even when its on the half way line, making sure his team have enough of the ball to feel like they have some control etc.

Certain managers just want the end result. Mourinho for example. Other managers would prefer to lose the match as long as they had most of the ball like Guardiola. So it really depends who you would want based on what your manager and team are trying to accomplish. But I would think that most would pick De Bruyne due to the popularity of wanting to have most of the ball

 

[wolvored]

In hindsight if you were offered 26 years old De Bruyne or Fernandes, I think most football fans would pick De Bruyne, and even with Utd bias, more Utd fans would also pick him than Bruno as well. I think the difference is consistency. De Bruyne ranges from above average to WC and Fernandes poor to WC.

 

[Bebestation]

Bruno would be rated higher by fans only if he played for any other team except ours.

Exceptional player that doesn’t have the benefit of playing in a well rounded team like De Bruyne always got.

 

[Brwned]

In hindsight if you were offered 26 years old De Bruyne or Fernandes, I think most football fans would pick De Bruyne, and even with Utd bias, more Utd fans would also pick him than Bruno as well. I think the difference is consistency. De Bruyne ranges from above average to WC and Fernandes poor to WC.

100% one of the biggest myths about De Bruyne. It’s incredible how often you hear commentators say ”you almost never see De Bruyne have games like this”, when he can barely string a pass together. Like against Morocco a couple of weeks ago. He went half a season playing most games like that not long ago. He’s had plenty of games like that for club and country.

 

[Galactic]

Results dictate ratings, unfortunately

 

[TheRedDevil'sAdvocate]

I wouldn't use the WC to draw any safe conclusions. Portugal is a group of players at the peak of their powers who enjoy playing with and for each other (except for Ronaldo, perhaps, but the so much "hated" Santos showed that he has a plan to win matches with and without him) while Belgium looked like an old rock group that never really made it big, despite the heavy promotion, and got back together for one last half-arsed attempt at success. Richarlison at Brazil is another example of a good player who's enjoying his time with the NT. Unless you want to believe that he's world-class, too.

KdB is probably the best midfielder in the world when it comes to creating chances in transition. His ability to carry the ball through the lines and execute while running with the ball is simply sublime. I don't know if this makes him the best midfielder the PL has ever seen (probably not), but in an age dominated by pressing tactics and with the main objective being to control the midfield, it comes as no surprise that his particular skill-set gets praised so often. Kante isn't the best defensive midfielder in the history of football either, but he's an absolute monster when it comes to defensive transitions and he can also carry the ball through the lines. The praise he gets is also justified. What these two offer at the highest level, in different aspects of the game, is verticality. And verticality is a more than precious commodity in the midfield battle.

I also can't see how playing for Pep is something to be held against a player. Is it that easy to get into a Guardiola side? It takes a great amount of discipline and adjusting of one's skills to make the cut and become a Pep player, even when the natural talent is obvious. Which, kind of, is the main criticism of Bruno, isn't it? That he's too erratic when it comes to both his movement without the ball and his decisions with it. This, of course, doesn't make him a lesser footballer than KdB. But a less valued player in a football world dominated by strict tacticians? Maybe.

Someone mentioned Gerrard, who was also a brilliant footballer and a natural leader. He also had his best seasons at Liverpool, when the whole team's setup was designed to take the best out of him. It's true that SG excelled at different roles on the pitch and he often didn't have teammates of equal quality, but the fact remains. Everything at Liverpool was designed to accommodate him. Again, this is not something to be held against him. It is what it is. Bruno is closer to him than to the likes of KdB. You can see it at United, and you can also see it when he plays for the NT. You can see it when he plays with and without Ronaldo. He needs fluidity around him. When he "stirs the pot" with his movement, the others have to be in sync, they have to constantly be in motion to open up pockets of space in dangerous areas. Under these circumstances, Bruno can thrive either by finding the killer pass or by getting in the box to finish the job himself. You throw the 37yo version of Ronnie in with his more "fixed" role on the pitch, waving his arms at the far post, and the systemic problems start to appear.

Both are great to watch on their day. I don't think that Bruno would have thrived in the well-drilled machine that is City under Guardiola. This, in my eyes, elevates KdB higher. He's been one of the main contributors to one of the best sides in the world for 5-6 years now. But in the mess that is United in the post-SAF era, a team that's often carried by Bruno's talent, he would have been thrown to the dogs by now.

 

[LawCharltonBest]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Fat KDB looks like James Corden

 

[wolvored]

100% one of the biggest myths about De Bruyne. It’s incredible how often you hear commentators say ”you almost never see De Bruyne have games like this”, when he can barely string a pass together. Like against Morocco a couple of weeks ago. He went half a season playing most games like that not long ago. He’s had plenty of games like that for club and country.

As has Bruno. Everyone I know who isnt a Utd fan when asked who they would sooner have all say Bruno is a decent player, but De Bruyne better. City at the moment are a better team and Bruno might have more good performances at City and De Bruyne worse if he had played for us, over the last few years.

 

[Brwned]

As has Bruno. Everyone I know who isnt a Utd fan when asked who they would sooner have all say Bruno is a decent player, but De Bruyne better. City at the moment are a better team and Bruno might have more good performances at City and De Bruyne worse if he had played for us, over the last few years.

Oh I think it’s a no brainer that de Bruyne has had the better peak, maintained it for a longer period and will end with the more successful and impressive career. Bruno would need to perform miracles in his 30s to overturn that. I’m just saying this idea that De Bruyne doesn’t have poor performances in his regular range is provably false. For whatever reason games like against Morocco just fade away. It’s just one of those myths that stuck.

 

[Zetrio2002]

De Bruyne has better composure. His movement were still very efficient even when Man City was desperate for a result against Aston villa and he eventually provided the assist for City to take the win and the title.

Just his titles and his past achievements with Belgium, Wolfsburg and City already make De Bruyne better. He's old now but you cannot blame him for Belgium's exit. Lukaku has 4 rather great chances to score.

Bruno, on the other hand, lacks composure when it matters. Like he will choke when his team is losing. He will start missing the target over and over. A slight off target against Morocco, against other teams like Chelsea. Or he will keep shooting and wastes attacking chances.

 

[SirReginald]

Genuine question. Has a WC Bruno ever turned up against the best teams or does he just pick off the bad ones?

He is a great player but his skill set is also more limited than a genuine WC player. If he doesn’t come into a game with an end product you seem to end up carrying him. There is no time where you come away thinking “he was quiet but he was fine”. He is either tearing a new asshole on a team or he is passing it out of play and yelling at someone for not getting it when he gave them no chance.

That’s the difference between him and De Bruyne. De Bruyne is equally capable of acting as a simple cog in a machine as he is at being his teams inspiration. He can play wide, he can play behind a striker and he can play a little deeper, something Bruno has never been comfortable with.

The best analogy I can give about Bruno is this, he is the chance card on the monopoly board. Sometimes it gives you a nice little payout, other times it’ll put you straight in jail.

 

[cyberman]

Genuine question. Has a WC Bruno ever turned up against the best teams or does he just pick off the bad ones?

He is a great player but his skill set is also more limited than a genuine WC player. If he doesn’t come into a game with an end product you seem to end up carrying him. There is no time where you come away thinking “he was quiet but he was fine”. He is either tearing a new asshole on a team or he is passing it out of play and yelling at someone for not getting it when he gave them no chance.

That’s the difference between him and De Bruyne. De Bruyne is equally capable of acting as a simple cog in a machine as he is at being his teams inspiration. He can play wide, he can play behind a striker and he can play a little deeper, something Bruno has never been comfortable with.

Of course he has. He’s had great games v all the top sides, no use in pretending otherwise. His record for us in CL alone speaks for itself

 

[RedDevil@84]

Genuine question. Has a WC Bruno ever turned up against the best teams or does he just pick off the bad ones?

You will know on 22-Apr

 

[Cascarino]

It’s an impossible debate really, Bruno would look twice as good with mental figures in that city side while debruyne wouldn't look amazing in the United team the last few years.

Bruno was a goal and assist machine despite being surrounded by dross wiry shit managers with traffic cones to aim at:

Bruno would be rated higher by fans only if he played for any other team except ours.

Exceptional player that doesn’t have the benefit of playing in a well rounded team like De Bruyne always got.

Im not so sure about the argument that Bruno would be twice the player in a better side. Often times Bruno has shown his best when he’s been granted complete freedom in a positional and tactical sense. Not just having the attacks funnelled through him but given license to try and lock the defender or make things happen as much as he wants. I don’t think it was a coincidence that his best football came about when United were hitting teams on the counter, and his excellent chance creation and vision when it came to passing allowed him to constantly set Rashford Martial and Greenwood loose. Playing in a superior side he’d have to be more restrained, as well as negating his big strength it’d also highlight his weaknesses when it comes to composure and ball retention. He’s a good player with excellent work rate so he’d be able to adjust just fine, but you wouldn’t get a marked improvement from him.

It’s like the argument that if you swapped Gerrard and Scholes you’d end up getting massive improvements from Gerrard, when the reality was the role Gerrard was given to him (in part due to the quality of some of those around him) allowed for him to flourish. Whereas in that swap he wouldn’t have been given the same role at a side as strong as United were.

 

[eire-red]

They're both class, but different and so hard to compare stylistically. However, only one of them ever shows up for the Manchester Derby. And that's what sets apart De Bruyne in my eyes, he always delivers on the big occasion. Bruno can tend to disappear in the big games.

 

[Black Alabaster]

From a technical standpoint there is nothing between them, both can ping, float, bend, thunderclap, disguise, no-look, first time flick it round a corner when circumstance arises. They can both get on the end of things and run in behind too altho KDB does dribble better. The biggest difference is between the eyes.

I like the thought experiment "if you put bruno in at city would he improve". Personally I could see Pep loving the personality and player Bruno is, taking attacking responsibility and constructing attacks. Also presses like mad and gets stuck in with a great engine.

I could so easily imagine pep getting into Brunos' face at full time like he loves to do to players, poking and prodding his chest whilst doing his tactical instruction hand waving and Bruno being the personality type that would rise to that type of aggressive, upfront ego challenging man management.

Swap Bruno into these two situations where pep is doing his shouting & tactical "Why you didn't give this pass! You should of done this!" routine. I actually believe he would flourish under pep and be better than he has for us

 

[Bondi77]

I am glad that Bruno plays for us and his stats have been great since he has been here but in all seriousness KDB is a better player...simples.

 

[El Jefe]

This thread shouldn't even exist. The fact that there have been very few bumps of this thread tells you all you need to know. Bruno is clearly a level below KDB.