I don't dislike his persona or the way he handled the media. What i think many of us dislike is the fact the squad he signed and put together in the PL for all the money that we spent on wages, and fees and debts we built up, what did we have to show for it? Absolutely nothing of value, he left us with an old aging squad of players past the best and not good enough for that division. He did well to get us there. However he probably had one of the worst 18 months in the history of the club form wise at one point, which some say is 'playing as expected', i say not good enough.
Personally I find the pictures funnier than having the 'was Phil Brown any good' debate again. Of course he ****ing was. But then something happened and he wasn't any more.
We had the highest league finishes in our history and less debt than most other clubs that went up. Nobody really comes out of that league with a pot. Blackpool and Burnley didn't and they had the public decision to spend sod all.
Fair enough but if someone is going to say something about it, i feel like i have the right to say my opinion back... DMD - Exactly we went up with no debt but come down with tons, can you deny that was PB's fault? Can you deny that the awful squad we had was his fault? The Bullard saga surely his fault? Awful results? There all his fault. He has a lot of goodwill for getting us to the position he did, but what happened afterwards can't be forgotten. Its like those who built the titanic, great piece of engineering, yet the fact it sank can't be forgotten.
Of course, that's why this is an open forum. I'm quite happy for you to have your opinion so long as you're happy for me to add this: please log in to view this image
We came down with far less debt than most clubs in our position. As for fault, tomorrow, tell your boss you're going out to buy a Jaguar car to run about in for the business and see if he lets you. Like a football manger, he'll have a set budget he has to work to. You can blame Phil Brown for performances on the pitch, but he didn't set the finances. There's no need to try and play down the highest positions we've ever been in. The prestige that brought us as a club is still paying dividends as it helps attract players.
As David Sylvian might say 'I second that emotion' Browny might have had his faults, who doesn't, but he gave us some of the most unforgettable Hull City memories, before we even kicked off v Fulham 16/8/2008.
Wasnt the club bought for £10m which we now know was not a cash injection but as a debt to the club. Add to this the promotion season which saw a deficit of £10m too. That was £20m debt in going up Anyway, in keeping within the theme - here is one for the headset brigade - a huge part of Phil Browns management style http://www.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article208532.ece/ALTERNATES/s615/image-16-for-premiership-gallery-09-05-09-gallery-924984839.jpg
I'd have to dig out the accounts from back then, but I'm pretty sure the club debt was countered by SMC debts to the club, there was definitely a fuss made about money being loaned in and out of the club through all sorts of businesses connected to Bartlett. I don't know why anyone would think the £10M was an investment in the club though, that would have meant the old owners just gave the club away.
