I get what you're saying but he's regressed this year - we have no time for sentimentality in our current state. Same as with DDG, great players at the club at the wrong time.
Is it sensible to carry on with Bruno as the focal point of our team next season?
- Thread starter Bastian
- Start date
He's output has declined massively over the last 18 months, both in terms of goals and assists.
He's only scored 3 league goals this season, and 8 the season before. The simple matter is, if he is not scoring or assisting, he's a bit useless.
I think we need to start looking for a replacement.
He's only scored 3 league goals this season, and 8 the season before. The simple matter is, if he is not scoring or assisting, he's a bit useless.
I think we need to start looking for a replacement.
I think we are currently 5 goals under out expected, we clearly have no good finishers.
But don't you think requiring someone of Haaland's calibre in itself is an issue? Only one team has him and most other teams manage just fine.
Miles past his prime.
I think it’s more the quality of chances De Bruyne creates compared to Bruno. Bruno creates a lot of half chances that are not easy finishes where as DeBruyne lays them on a plate for someone to finish.
Anyone who watches them can see DeBruyne is miles ahead in ability and quality but you know what stats say Bruno creates more.
I'm not being sentimental. If you look at the statistics his having an almost identical season to Ødegaard, who appears to be flying at Arsenal. Yet he is superior to him defensively and still creating more. It serves to show just how our bad season as a team has made some of our better performers like him appear average to poor.
The point was though, De Bruyne racks up more assists because he has someone like that finishing them of. Fernandes has Rashford… who isn’t as clinical.
Bruno is on the decline, I think that’s obvious to see, he might still be racking up the chances created but his overall performances are an issue as he gives the ball and therefore control of the game away far to much.
If we are talking about evolving as a team we should look to move him on and replace with someone who can control the game more and spread chance creation throughout the team.
If we are talking about evolving as a team we should look to move him on and replace with someone who can control the game more and spread chance creation throughout the team.
Haaland is just a represenation of the ideal though. At the very least a highly creative has to behind an attack with decent goal scoring and coordinating ability to shine. Bruno right now plays behind our worst combined in decades. With strictly Rasmus looking like the only able to deliver goals consistently and combined consistently with the rest.
Whilst KDB since reaching City has never operated behind such a mostly mpotent attack in terms of chance taking
Assists have nothing to do with Bruno’s chance creation; it’s not his fault the chances aren’t finished.
I just don’t know with him.
Where’s the data on this? I was in here earlier & saw some claim he only creates ‘half chances’.
I love him
There’s a decent post from @Zehner in the Fernandes thread which basically illustrates that Fernandes’ quality of chances created are basically the same/a little worse than the other major playmakers in the league, and a bit more worse than KDB directly: https://www.redcafe.net/threads/bruno-fernandes-2023-24-performances.478034/post-31683517
It’s the wrong role for Mctominay really, surely Amrabat at DM and pushing Mainoo up a bit would be better
No, but we cannot sell until we find a replacement. I would keep him for another 1 to 2 years before selling him off.
Anonymous today.
The only reason he's the focal point is because we don't have a striker. Stick an RvP, RvN, Rooney type player into the mix and it alleviates much of the perceived reliance on Bruno, since we would be scoring a hell of a lot more goals and accruing more points along the way.
Thanks.
‘So in essence, Bruno makes up for a slightly lower chance quality with a higher frequency. In terms of raw output, he's on a similar level to Ödegaard and Saka but significantly behind de Bruyne.’
He’s on a similar level to the Arsenal boys with more frequency & is bested by a generational player in KdB. I don’t read that data as him creating ‘half chances’ as opposed to others creating ‘full’ ones.
In his last season played as a 10 he created nearly a chance more than his contemporaries, bar KdB, with 0.01 less xG. I’m not clued up on xG but can someone explain what it a difference of 0.01 actually means because for chance creation I’d rather have the player creating one more a game.
Bar KdB, we don’t consistently see any of Bruno’s peers serve up goal after goal anywhere near the rate though.
Everybody cites Arsenal as something extraordinary. By the EPL Big Chances Created table he’s created the same amount as Odegaard & 1 less than Saka, I’d say both those players are performing in a better coached side with better players.
Bruno is suffering from the ‘Not as good as X player who is generally an outlier’ syndrome. Is he the world’s best midfielder? Well obviously not but he creates for lesser players at a higher consistency than his replacement level opponents.
We need to eventually replace him [sooner rather than later hopefully] but saying he creates ‘half chances’ just doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.
He’s literally never had a good game against a top side.
This for me is the main issue. The tactics being deployed actually accentuate his shortcomings instead of empowering the better parts of his game.
He’s a 10. If his lack of performance in a different role were a standout with other players excelling I’d be far more ready to criticise him but the tactic is shite for the squad available.
I’d keep him and buy his replacement so we can phase him out, Florian Witz is the obvious choice.
On his day a great player. Very technically capable, can make passes few others can, when he's got his shooting boots on he's always dangerous from outside the box, and the quality I most appreciate in him he's got energy that's unmatched in our team and he works his socks off.
But the decision to give him a new contract was absolute madness worthy of Woodward. He was OK in the Community Shield, but since signing the contract he's on a run of four poor matches, bad decision making, nowhere near clinical enough in front of goal, taking shots with no angle, and also taking shots with no pressure on him and whacking them way off target and whinging when he's easily dispossessed.
It would have been so much healthier to not give him a new contract and utilise him as a squad player, so when he's in top form he plays all the time, and when he's lacklustre he's on the bench. If he doesn't feel adequately valued we could have sold him for quite a good fee.
He seems to me a maverick player that requires a workhorse midfield around him and counter attacking players ahead of him, but he plays like the main workhorse, the final passer, the tempo controller, and our performances are too dependent upon his playing well.
The captaincy also is an added burden I think. We've got another captain in-waiting in de Ligt, but it's hard to see how Bruno ceases to be the focal point and the mainstay in the team even when he's playing poorly. And that contract decision really cemented that.
But the decision to give him a new contract was absolute madness worthy of Woodward. He was OK in the Community Shield, but since signing the contract he's on a run of four poor matches, bad decision making, nowhere near clinical enough in front of goal, taking shots with no angle, and also taking shots with no pressure on him and whacking them way off target and whinging when he's easily dispossessed.
It would have been so much healthier to not give him a new contract and utilise him as a squad player, so when he's in top form he plays all the time, and when he's lacklustre he's on the bench. If he doesn't feel adequately valued we could have sold him for quite a good fee.
He seems to me a maverick player that requires a workhorse midfield around him and counter attacking players ahead of him, but he plays like the main workhorse, the final passer, the tempo controller, and our performances are too dependent upon his playing well.
The captaincy also is an added burden I think. We've got another captain in-waiting in de Ligt, but it's hard to see how Bruno ceases to be the focal point and the mainstay in the team even when he's playing poorly. And that contract decision really cemented that.
If we can get a Wirtz level player sure, but wouldn't replace him for the sake of it or for someone like Mount.
I hope we bring Gomes back to the club but I don't think he has the output we need.
I hope we bring Gomes back to the club but I don't think he has the output we need.
We need a class no.10 in the mould of a KDB or Odegaard to unlock our attacking play.
We might not even need to look for Bruno replacement if Amad turns out a proper player, especially now with Zirkzee skillset added to the squad.
Mount is a different player but arguably we need more this type than what Bruno offers - on a good day that is, because lately he's just shit.
I appreciate the sentiment of taking pressure off him, because it's been immense since he joined. But we are so much worse without it'd hard to find an appropriate game.
We don‘t have a stand-in for him in the squad; our other options in the squad are different types of players.
Angel Gomes is a good shout.
I‘d take Tijani Reijnders, and Xavi Simons looks very promising as well.
Angel Gomes is a good shout.
I‘d take Tijani Reijnders, and Xavi Simons looks very promising as well.
He hasn’t been the focal point of Ten Hag’s United for a season and a half, it’s just that the other players around him have performed so poorly that the stats would indicate he is.
He's not a focal point. That doesn't really exist in a team sport. It takes all eleven to make or break a season.
But he's at the stage now where he should be rotated and played according to form. Which means the majority of the time he will still be in the team and deservedly so.
Just not always.
But he's at the stage now where he should be rotated and played according to form. Which means the majority of the time he will still be in the team and deservedly so.
Just not always.
Bruno's style of play is a bit of a double edged sword.
He has such a high output in terms of goals and assists but also breaks down so many attacks due his high risk approach.
I'd also suggest he is a bit of a liability defensively as even though he presses a lot, it is always very erratic, all energy and very little structure.
He has such a high output in terms of goals and assists but also breaks down so many attacks due his high risk approach.
I'd also suggest he is a bit of a liability defensively as even though he presses a lot, it is always very erratic, all energy and very little structure.
I agree with what you say but that’s exactly the problem. He does play always. And then you get to the point as made by several others; if he’s kept on regardless of opposition, team strategy or form, he can become a liability. So in that sense it’s a coaching issue.
“Is it sensible to continue with Bruno as the focal point of our team next season?”
The simple answer is yes unless we find someone better. Bruno consistently delivers in terms of creativity, work rate and leadership. Unless we sign a player who can offer more in those key areas, it makes sense to keep him as the central figure in our team.
The simple answer is yes unless we find someone better. Bruno consistently delivers in terms of creativity, work rate and leadership. Unless we sign a player who can offer more in those key areas, it makes sense to keep him as the central figure in our team.
Agree, but we should find someone the share the load.
On the new contract, I think it was most likely due to the fact he wanted parity with top earners like Rashford and Cas, so it is hard to blame INEOS on this, he is the most productive player we have and is made club captain, keeping him happy was paramount for the new management for now.
On the rest, very unfair characterization of the player, he does his best and the problems are tactical as well as overall team performance, he might have a poor game sometimes but he is still a focal point in this team and for a good reason.
@Marwood sorry can't quote your post for some reason so the below is a response.
The question then becomes who do you play instead of him?
Mount is not a creator, Eriksen's does not have the legs to run around and press like Bruno, Mainoo is not a creator too, the problem is we do not have anyone in the team to replace Bruno, unless we change tactics all together, else, we have no choice but to play him as long as he is available.
The question then becomes who do you play instead of him?
Mount is not a creator, Eriksen's does not have the legs to run around and press like Bruno, Mainoo is not a creator too, the problem is we do not have anyone in the team to replace Bruno, unless we change tactics all together, else, we have no choice but to play him as long as he is available.
Problem is more a formation, dunno why we stuck with this whole number 10 shit position.
Regarding the contract, two wrongs don't make a right. INEOS were (are) looking to restore our wage bill and maybe the logic there is that it's merit based. Well, Rashford and Casemiro are on contracts way above their importance and ability. So sound thinking would be to offload Casemiro at the earliest opportunity and, if Rashford doesn't produce world class performances, offload him as well. Which is what I think should happen.
When you've got a 29 (turning 30) year old who has played a lot of football, on a 2+1 contract earning around 200K, to extend that deal by a year and raise his wage significantly is just stupid. There is no other top European club that would give him this contract, I don't think. And rightly so. He should have been told to be happy with his present deal and that they were looking to move out those earning way above their actual value.
With regards to him as a player, I consider him a #10. Not an #8. I don't think he'll work as an #8, but if he somehow can, then I'd play a 433 with him rotating with other #8s. We don't need a #10, unless that #10 is outrageous and, consistent, which he isn't.
He does his best, of course he does. No doubts about his doing his all. I like him and obviously rate him as a player, but I don't think he should be the one we build a team around and that contract was the worst decision since INEOS built a new football structure.