What exactly do you think, and denying yourself the benefit of hindsight, ( because he has undoubtedly made mistakes) he should have done differently at specific times to make Rivers a better and stronger club?

And remember, you're denied the benefit of hindsight.

It's hard to be objective about your own club, I'd agree. But to focus on the negatives would be
A. Churlish, given recent history
B. No fun

It's also perhaps hard to be objective about your rivals and that might similarly cloud opinions, is it fair to say?

Though not intended for me, s'good question.

I think everything was pretty much bob on through the Morgan era. Even where the board are self-critical about the balance of investment in first team vs developing players, I think top-down worked in getting us established.
I was always nervous about the move towards 'youth' and 'potential' in 2012 - I hoped it'd come good, but could see issues with the 'it works for Saints, Leeds and Wigan' argument even making optimistic assumptions about where our infrastructure was at. The idea that Sandercock could scale up his success with Uate across a squad with many talented but erratic players, was always going to be a big ask. I also think he was perhaps asked to do too much - sorting out our youth structures and the first team.
That, trying to be as honest as I can be, is without hindsight.

You've got to remember that I only questioned his bemoaning year on year of poor performances and that he likes to (imo) use lines like 'the players should match the attitude of the fans' knowing full well that the fans hold him in such high regard, thus deflecting any (not saying there is or isn't) blame away from himself. I think that is detrimental to the unity of the squad, again imo.

I would never be so bold as to suggest ways he should run his club.

But ateotd what the has it got to do with you?