Which makes me wonder why we have tolerated it to the extent that we have. Some of the performances this season have been a waste of time and money for both the club and supporters.
At the last supporters' forum a fortnight before Christmas (which was primarily to discuss the ground redevelopment situation) someone suggested we would have been better off staying part time and retaining the bulk of last season's squad. Ben Clasper's reply was something along the lines of "with hindsight I sometimes think the same thing myself".
The switch to a full time regime was first publicly floated at a forum around the end of last season. At the December forum Ben basically admitted that the transition had been rushed through during the summer without really beginning soon enough meaning, whilst we were in the market for a higher calibre of player than the previous year, once again we were too late to sign several of our preferred transfer targets. Ben also stated that dealing with professional players (and presumably their agents) regarding contract negotiations is more challenging than before.
So, reading between the lines, I'm guessing the directors may feel partly responsible for not giving the manager the best chance to make full use of the available resources. That doesn't excuse the complete failure to make any sort of improvement whatsoever on last season's performance so far, but I do believe it's a bit more nuanced than concluding that "the manager was given everything he asked for - why aren't we doing better?"
I know when Maidstone were first promoted to the National Division just a year after winning the Isthmian League they remained part-time and struggled before going full-time for the second season. They continued to struggle, were relegated after two more seasons and are now in their third season as a full-time club. I've seen comments from a few of their supporters on social media suggesting they'd be better off spending the same yearly budget and being part-time, as they'd then be competing for the best part-time players rather than the cheapest full-time professionals. I'm not sure how valid that argument might be but there are certainly going to be some very good players who just aren't willing to give up a day job to commit to playing full-time for Maidstone or ourselves. I guess there must be an overlap between what the biggest spending part-time clubs are paying and what the lowest spending full-time clubs are spending, and I'm guessing we're somewhere within that range.
For what it's worth my own feeling is that lack of continuity is a bigger factor than budget in our poor season. We always seem to do better when we keep the previous season's squad together and just strengthen two or three positions. For our best season of all we kept everyone of note except Drage and Sekajja, brought in Hayles and Acheampong which gave real strength in depth at the back, then picked up Ferguson and Allassani after the season was underway. We then kept the same squad through to the end of the season with no more comings and goings except for short-term cover.
I think we've got some good younger players in the current squad, plus Clunis, Taylor and Edwards from the Isthmian days, while Mills is superb for me, but maybe we've overloaded with senior players who've been around the block at this level and above. You need a few seasoned campaigners like that but I'm not sure we've got the balance right, maybe we'd have been better off trying to cherry pick a few hungry younger players from the league below? I've noticed this division seems to be a bit of a merry-go-round with a lot of similar players moving between similar clubs every summer. No wonder there seems to be little to choose between most sides.