There was no suggestion we do that and quite obviously the point is to highlight what can be done with a limited squad, with limited resource in a short time while we bleat on about how hard done by we've been. They may only be 21st but they looked dead and buried and didn't even score for 11 games!
You can't exclude form when it suits. Yes we can say over the season we've been the 5th best side and that's absolutely true, I'm a big believer in tables don't lie, but that's owing in large part to being THE best, or among the two best for the first 12 or so games under a different manager. Since Manning left (Clarke went in before that), we sit 14th while Cheltenham sit 10th having played a game less. Oh, and we spent a fortune in January, crowned coincidentally with their standout player, while they haven't spent a penny on fees all season. Since selling us Goodwin they've managed 2 more points than us with a game to spare and we can't have any complaints about the fixtures.
So I'm not dismissing what you're saying as it's perfectly factual but it depends where you want to draw the comparisons because in the fine print is a much more damning position that the one you've chosen to focus on. The reality is one club has pulled itself together from rock bottom and propelled forward while the other is still soul searching in mid table from once being in a real position if strength. We continue to dine out on Manning's success but the league will catch up soon. Fwiw I'm ot suggesting, and I don't think AndyofCrosby was either, that Oxford and Cheltenham are comparable jobs because they aren't. But it does cut through the fat of some of the excuses and smokescreens being put out there that are letting Des off extremely lightly at times. If Clarke can do the job he's done at Cheltenham, it's not in any way unfair to expect a bit more than we're getting out of a manager that cost us the best part of a million quid.