It never fails to amuse (or occasionally exasperate) me to read some posters who after a defeat or a couple, suddenly decide that Clough isn’t up to the job or we need this or that player.  The razor blade merchants are out in force drowning out those who counsel patience.

Let’s look at the statistics (yes, I know the old adage about damned lies): Clough’s tenure last season covered 20 games which yielded 25 points.  That’s an average of 1.25 points per game; if this were to be replicated over the whole season that would give us 57.5 points which would be 3 points better than last season and move us up into fifteenth place.  So even if Clough does not improve his games / points ratio, we would still be better off than last season.

Given that Clough has a track record of improvement every season he was with Burton, let’s assume that he achieves 5% improvement this season.  That would give us 60 points which would achieve around the thirteenth or fourteenth place mark.

So far with 3 points out of 2 games – this works out at 1.5 points per game which – if maintained - would give us a total of 69 points at the end of the season.  That would give us a respectable eighth place – just off the play-offs.  So at this stage, our Nigel has achieved a remarkable 83% improvement on his ratio of last season.

But the truth is whichever way you look at it - this is all meaningless and bullsh*t simply because there are so many variables yet to come that we cannot predict; that is the beauty of football.  Of course, I hope fervently that this rate of improvement is maintained and I shall be a very happy man at the end of the season if we get to eighth place.  Reason and bitter experience tells me otherwise.

On a different tack, some posters have questioned the Board’s commitment – urging the Board to dig deep into their pockets and complaining that Clough isn’t being supported with adequate funding or that they are only in it for the money.  So I had a look at this website: General Sports.

It makes for interesting reading and gives an insight into what the Board is about.  Regardless of what they paid for the takeover and what investment they have or haven’t put in; as a company, GSE are very much into sales promotion, sponsorship through building alliances and offer consultancy services amongst other things. 

My interpretation of what GSE is about means that they are here for a fairly long duration.  I say this because Derby County as a club (as opposed to just the first team) is under-developed as a marketing commodity. 

That would involve substantial development of alliances with businesses which indicates to me that they need to consolidate – and increase - the attendances at Pride Park so that businesses are favourably impressed with the access to a market that GSE can offer.  They also offer a consultancy and quite naturally GSE need a case study to underpin their credentials – which appears to me to be just Derby County at the moment (although they were looking for others).

Because GSE is a business, they are into making a profit – but in my view, it is not by selling their flagship (us), but by maximising the commercial opportunities that Derby County and Pride Park offer and selling their other services. 

I have no doubt that GSE will be pitching very hard to ensure that Pride Park is one of the 2018 World Cup venues and coincidentally that will probably mean that the size of Pride Park will increase within the next five years and they will want to see Derby County as a settled Premiership club similar to Everton or Aston Villa by then, with a healthy annual profit margin which in turn enhances their status as consultants to other sports establishments.

All this, of course, is dependent on Clough producing the goods.  Again, I suspect that the Board have gone after someone in their own image.  That is someone who subscribes to their beliefs and values of building up steadily rather than quick and risky expansion. 

So it may well be that Clough has declined to spend rather than the Board is refusing him the funds.  GSE know that at some stage, there is a need to invest to ensure their objectives are achieved against their need for profitability.  My impression is that they are very far from being asset strippers – they are into development and that also means eventual and sustained success on the field.

Unfortunately for those crying for a quick fix, it seems that for Clough, organisation, morale and commitment are more important at this stage in his development of the whole football department of the club, not just the first team.  From what I see, Clough is orientated towards performances and not results.  With the right sort of performance, the results will come and incidentally keep the attendances high by producing attractive football.

Davies, by contrast, was focused on results – very successfully, but the lack of foundations and team ethos that sustains a club over a long period was cruelly exposed in the all too brief sojourn in the Premiership despite his frantic spending and massive over-recruitment of the backroom in the close season.

An interesting statistic – Derby’s average attendance in the Championship in their promotion year was 28,131 ( link ) and last year’s was 29,440. So for all Davies’ success, he wasn’t bringing in the bums on seats that GSE require for sustained long-term achievement.

Regardless of what some fans would want, I think we are in a period of slow, steady development with quite a few disappointments built in along the way. I would rather that than aiming to nick a record number of one-nil wins.

Speaking of records – had a quick look at the Premiership and sad to say, I can’t see any team beating (!) ours this year, not even Burnley….

Photo: Action Images

Leeds United Polls