Compared to the cowboys, they've been stunningly good.
In a more balanced evaluation, I think you'd have to say they've done well without being, so far, exceptionally good.
What they're usually good at is dealing with particular issues. They've been poor at reacting to sudden problems, such as Suarez and the FA. That really highlights the negatives of having a scattered absentee ownership. If there's a problem looming on the horizon, and they have time to think about it, such as the stadium and revenue, then they're a very safe pair of hands, with real sensitivity, too.
They've also, at times, been positive in the transfer market.
But to progress, I'd say they need to really settle into an ongoing process: be present more often, improve their week to week, day to day, monitoring and interaction within the club, and develop a more coherent long term system of management.
They key comparison, I'd say, is with the John Smith/Peter Robinson running of the club. They ran the club really smoothly, always anticipating issues on multiple levels, having almost a sixth sense for when to plan and act. FSG are, aside from Gordon, too distant to do that, which is why they remain, largely, an overly passive and reactive regime. If someone shouts a lot and whistles, they'll snap into action, but they need to move on to the next level now. And that's hard when you're in various parts of the US, distracted by numerous other business commitments and pressures.
Bringing in Peter Moore was an excellent move, and I'll give them more time and trust to see how he joins things up.
