The Bros and an alternative view

[Jampie]

As to the entertainment factor...

Has anyone ever commented on this forum something like "ok so we won that match 3-1 but it was sooooo boring"?

I suspect if we win more matches the "this is boring" narrative will evaporate. Of course I could be wrong but I don't think so.

[the_anticlough]

A big positive for me is that gone are the days I'd rip my hair out due to a manager's defensive approach.

There's nothing worse than watching your team when you know they do not have enough on the pitch to take the game to the opposition (actually doing that is another matter). Like going out for the day in underwear 2 or 3 sizes too small for you. You just can't breathe!

Most owners, DoFs, managers will say they want to see entertaining, attacking football, especially when they just get started.
Under owners like Trew though, over time through slippage, managers like Curle and Derry would con them and the fans by putting out teams that were all about job preservation, 5 or 6 defenders, 3 holding midfielders, unwatchable stuff like that.

The Bros come from a football background though, through the Radar, and employ people that understand what's being put out on the pitch. The last time I saw ultra-negative, job-preserving tendencies was under Ardley and they got shot of him (IB did a fair bit too).

Style of play, schemes of play, players' effectiveness are all different questions and fans will always have their different tastes.
But at least you don't have to watch games where you know you won't be able to do anything apart from scrape a 0-0, 1-1 or if you're very lucky a 1-0. And negative football leads to the opposition getting on top and defeats, but narrow-ish ones, as the coaches know they won't get sacked quickly for those.

Problems under SM are...a slow pace of play, constant team changes so no continuity, low confidence and low-level, poorly-performing players etc. but I'm satisfied they haven't been cheating the paying supporters with a negative approach overall.