leftsideoverhere

New mascot sorted, too:

"Is that a Filofax in your pocket or are you just pleased to see me?"

This. It's the footballing equivalent of "no-one ever got fired for buying an IBM" which is how that company managed to dominate the first three decades of office computing. But then, eventually, people discovered that the younger, more dynamic, more creative computer manufacturers could actually produce better products, with much more customisation to people's actual needs, for prices way below IBM. It took ages for that information to actually change purchasing trends though because big corporations were risk averse. In football it's not the biggest clubs which are the most risk averse, but those in the bottom half of the Premier League. They are, arguably, the clubs with the most to lose if their decisions go wrong. A bad season for a top six team might mean a slight reduction in TV and sponsorship income, and the indignity of playing in the Europa League, but one wrong decision for the likes of Wolves or West Ham (or us, obviously) and they could be facing five or six years in the wilderness that is the EFL, with all the financial and recruitment consequences that go with losing their place at the Premier League trough. So it's no surprise that those clubs recycle the same "safe pair of hands" managers over and over rather than taking a punt on someone who is doing well in league one. If they appoint David Moyes and get relegated then it's Moyes' fault. If they employ an unknown option and get relegated then it will be seen as the board's failure.

What if his source was wrong, and this wasn't going to happen until someone from the club read @Skidmark's post, and thought it was a good idea?