baildon blue said:
Who ever took over after Swales was on a losing ticket.
Im afraid you bought his hype. He was good at that, passing the buck like a Tory prime minister. What what you've said above couldn't be further from the truth.
At the time franny came in (93?)everyone wanted a piece of the clubs involved In the brand new premier league. Everyone knew that money was about to flood into the game, so people like the Edwards positioned themselves to be made for life. That's what franny wanted. Money and fame. He might have tried to make out this was altruistic but of course it wasn't.
Swales had run us bang into the red but we were bringing through good kids and didn't have a bad side. If franny had not made such awful decisions he could have made himself £10m in a few years and city would not have slid down the divisions. Some of those decisions? The appointment of ball was a bad one but what about the sale of flitcroft in the middle of a crucial- incredibly crucial given sky- relegation battles? He even managed to raise some cash from a rights issue and let frank Clark spunk the lot. The reason no one wanted to manage city when we were really shit was that franny put them off the job. He's always been full of himself and people could read that. He thought he knew more than the managers.
I don't mind franny looking for his slice of pie. It's business and that's what everyone does. I don't doubt he believed he could deliver and also tried his best. But his dictatorial nature caused ructions. Remember David makin's gmr rant? Said it all. And it toppled franny in the end.