You're talking about them as human beings though. That's not relevant to how good/bad they are at their job.
Define good at his job?
The Sky ratings are great whenever he’s on, he’s got the demand for a weekly podcast in addition to the televised stuff, the Overlap stuff etc.
The point is that the Sky product is partially decided to stir controversy, that’s why they have the likes of Keane on as often as they do.
With Neville you get some decent tactical analysis and lot of stuff which is designed to generate click, some of which he is doing knowingly and some of which because he’s just inherently extremely biased as to be fair I would be if I had that job.
If the aim is for balanced, objective punditry then sure; he’s not good at all, but for the job Sky employ him for he’s great.
To be honest by whatever metric you choose I’d rather watch him than Keys and fucking Gray, although to be honest I rarely watch any of th post-match stuff these days anyway.