That balance is skewed (very heavily) by the sales of Scott & Semenyo. prior to that, I don't think Person raked in a single £ in player sales. It's all subjective anyway, as look at the value they have applied to HNM, who we let go for free, I'm fairly sure nobody would pay that for him.
The balance. The objective reality. Sales of players outweigh investment in playing staff by tens of millions during Nigel Pearson's time. The clubs wages also dropped massively during the same timescale.
If what you say is true the fan base would be happy to see him go, and yet, that isn’t the case, a large section, possibly even a majority, didn’t want him to go. It’s hardly just RR that disagrees with you.
It seems that way, but can people really say that Pearson has progressed this team over the last 12 months, and I mean be honest!! The answer has to be no. In fact, I think - and have said many times, the issue was Fleming, not Pearson, he simply isn't a good enough head coach at this level. Amongst the clear out went 2 coaches who had done really well in the England setup, yet were cast aside for Fleming. Pearson has been on record any times saying he managed the club, so I assume that to mean oversight of players coming and going, wages, etc., and left the coaching to others. For me that has been his failing, not joining those 2 up sufficiently, and that played a large part in his departure. Also, I think some.... were/are blinded by the 'bigger name' syndrome that Pearson brought with him, not something overly common for us as BCFC fans, and, thinking that has to guarantee success.
Had the board backed him. And also given him a bit longer I think most fans would agree with you, but they didn’t . Most fans think he did ok in trying times and deserved an opportunity to see what he could do now we are through the worst of it.
Yes it is. No Manager in recent times has had a season of zero expenditure, seasons of income via player sales dwarfing expenditure and massively cutting wages at the same time, except Nigel Pearson.
2 different things Clifton. City had significant net profit on transfer dealings under LJ, as we have had under NP. The difference is on wages, we know LJ didn't control that as Head Coach, and NP did as Manager, their roles were very different, as was the economic landscape, another key point that is always overlooked when comparing these 2 managers. You can't combine them to make an argument, as they are distinct issues. If we use that theory, you could also argue that LJ is the only one of the 2 to buy players and sell at a profit and challenge for the play-offs. Combined, that statement is true, but there are many mitigating factors to that statement, as there are to yours. We have to move on now.
That's not what your post stated - Not the first City manager to do this in recent times. As you are agreeing with me now yes the club was being run in totally differing manners in recent times. Nigel Pearson's time was completely different.
