read what i said. what you posted above was in the first season. think before you post. what did PB...................DO CORRECTLY FROM MAY 2009 EH ? EXACTLY, NUFF SAID.
Well you said "after getting to the PL" I presumed that meant when we got to the PL, but I won't get into an English contest with you because obviously there's no chance I could win that. As for your well put question, he built and managed a team that had a good chance of staying up with 9 games to go, there were some decent performances in that season that get overlooked because of people's pro-Pearson revisionism, a draw at home against Chelsea, winning against Man City etc. I still firmly believe if Brown wasn't replaced with Dowie we'd be a midtable Premiership side now, not a midtable Championship side.
the problems of phil brown went way back in that season. the summer of 2009 player recruitement for starters. the willful waste of cash on rubbish. the naughty step that became a patio. the list is endless. i do agree that city should have kept PB for the last 9 games but Bartlett and the board panicked. we shall never know that now but i lost faith in Phil Brown before the Chelsea game and all hope after Turner was sold. is that clear enough for you. ?
All a case of ifs and buts. Brownie did amazingly well to get us up and keep us up. He was mismanaged by Duffen in terms of a media persona. I think Brownie would have secured more points than Dowie eventually did but we'll never know
Considering the prices that similar standard players have been sold for, Hunt, Mouyokolo, Myhill, Ricketts, Bullard and Geovanni should have made us between £15m and £18m.
Sorry but Percy is right here. PB did absolutely nothing wrong that season. You're always in a difficult position when you're the smallest club in a league and signings players was going to be very hard for him. His home form that year was fairly good, we only lost I think 3 games under PB at home all season, all to sides that would go on to make the Champions League that year. (Man U, Arsenal and Tottenham). Away from home we were piss poor, but anyone with a brain cell knows that you need a half decent defence to win away games. The club (not Brown, the club) sold Turner to pay the wages for that month. In that deal our hopes of winning an away match that season evaporated. And it's not even hindsight, I said after that deal was done we wouldn't win an away game all season and I was right, that kind of prediction doesn't come right by coincidence. It was clear for all to see we were going to struggle away from home due to selling our defence. How could PB have avoided that? I'm happy with the current management team too, and unlike Percy I don't see the two as mutually exclusive. PB is the best manager this club has had. I can't believe he is getting stick about it now.
Unfortunately the Brownie/Duffen/Bartletts regime legacy was to leave us nearly going out of business and having to be saved by the Allams. Things are done properly now, as they should be.
Duffen and Bartlett were ****e. Allams and AP are good. I get that, but this is a management thread. The manager's job is what goes on on the pitch. PB was a very good manager and he took us to unprecedented heights. NP may also one day be as good and I hope he is, but you can't compare what they've achieved to date.
It will come out in time. It may be OK to take money out of your own company but definitely not OK to try and blame others!
The performances against Chelsea, Man City were good, we played well and showed fight and are games i'll remember alongside early 08/09. But when it came to taking points off the likes of Wolves, Blackburn, West Ham, Birmingham, Stoke, Burnley, Sunderland and Wigan we were largely found wanting. We put in some good performances against the big hitters, but against the teams around us we struggled. By the time of Brown's sacking we had only won 5 games all season, had not won away for a year and were struggling at the bottom. It was largely acknowledge outside the club that we had the poorest side in the league and over the season results reflected that. Sacking Brown when we did was daft, we finally hammered the rest of that nail in the relegation coffin. But looking at the season as a whole we probably wouldn't have stayed up regardless of those handful of good performances. I think whoever was in charge we would have been relegated at the end of 09/10, i fail to see how we would have drastically inmproved in those last 9 games. Yes there was the Arsenal game, but that only came after 3 poor defeats against Blackburn, West Ham and Everton. Don't delude yourself that Brown would have kept us up and had us like Stoke as there was really nothing place to suggest that would be the case (results since january 2009 for example). What Brown would have achieved afterwards is hypothetical, we'll never know but even if we had Sir Alex in charge we'd still be in the same financial mess facing the same uncertain future. I like Brown and are grateful for what he did. He gave me the chance to see football i thought i would never see and which generations of city fans before me never saw. But things weren't going right and we were chamionship bound whether you like it or not. NP helped steady a sinking ship last season and if not for the poor start would have had us in the play offs. The start of this season hasn't been great, but there's still 41 games to go in which a lot can happen. Hopefully sometime soon we'll be back to enjoy those premier league games, may be if yhou just gave NP a chance and didn't jump on his back everytime we lost then people will cut you some slack.
