One thing which is curiously absent is any detail about what is going wrong.
If Hughes and Fernandes are the big future Hughes thinks they are - at a Club which has never been big or successful despite the Gregory years - why can't they give us a more credible explanation as to why such great players, such a wonderful manager, and such a boardroom football genius as Fernandes can't get it together?
If they are SO knowledgeable, expert and accomplished, they must know.
Unless the explanation is simply that they aren't any of these things. If they were, they would have known this was coming, and done things differently.
And it is happening because they don't know.
And there are so MANY things that don't make sense. Why the big spending spree in the first place? Why not cherry-pick a few key players, or even just a couple, and see how THEY got on first. A quality central defender, a quality striker.
I don't know if Hughes inherited solid squads at Blackburn and Fulham - the way incoming managers in the 1980s inherited solid squads with some effective players at QPR, even if they had been going through a bad patch.
We are being sold the idea of quality, but we know they aren't going for quality. If they were, we would be signing the sort of players the top clubs have. And we aren't. Our 'great' players seem to the ones the top Clubs wanted to get rid of.
Of course, just signing one or two key players would be undermined by injuries, but Hughes is saying this vast herd is stricken with injuries. Maybe that's why such a struggling Club could sign so much quality.
The quality was in the wages, not their effectiveness.
Is it just me? Do we lack an Alan McDonald? Or even a Shittu for this level? Or a Gary Bannister, an 18-20 goals a season man, however limited such a player might be in other ways.
We don't even have a Tony Sealy, who Venables managed to conjure 16 goals out of as a main striker in our promotion year.
Strange, because those players were largely workmanlike. We did occasionally sign big names, like Kenny Sansom, and Ray Wilkins, but that's another thing. Their performances were superb. We could see at once why they had the reputations they had.
If they were outclassed, or found wanting, it was usually by better players, better teams, bigger Clubs with more money. So it made sense.
But this doesn't make sense.
Now, we seem to sign players who, even if they look good, have very little to offer in terms of the pay-off.
I do wonder about their reasons for picking Hughes. He inherited a 6th place at Blackburn (twice before he got there) and a 7th place side at Fulham, and didn't do any worse, it is true, but did those Clubs have relatively stable squads. Like QPR in the 80s, with Neill and Dawes, McDonald and others, and a continuous tradition at that time of shrewd signings - Sansom, Wilkins, Seamen, Peacock (the wild defender, I mean).
Did the Board look around, and, with no experience, go for a Manager with a Name and a Reputation, rather than someone who really knew his stuff?
I think of Holloway desperately trying to cobble together survival in the second tier, but lifting morale, even when we lost and went down with a poor squad, and I think we saw a bloke who knew what to do.
Hughes had big names at City, but didn't know what to do with them, or the money. And he never seems to stay around anywhere long, so it is difficult to assess him on a long term basis.
There may be another factor, too. Maybe the Golden Era of Hope for the small clubs is drawing to an end, based, as it was, on a fantasy that if you have 'businessmen' making the decisions, you must succeed.
So now, Clubs like ours are just circulating the same old nonentities failures on the pitch and the same old failures in the dug-out. But with the hangover from the days when it was imagined that spending more and more in competitions where there is NEVER more and more to win represented either sound football sense or sound 'business' sense.
We might turn it round. Maybe we will be in the top half by the spring. But how long will that last? We're too good for the Holloways and Warnocks, it seems, not rich enough to do a Chelsea or a City, so our ambition is to join the tiny group of Clubs clinging to mid-table in the Premiership with dozens - if not scores - of similar Clubs chasing the same tiny handful of places.
Perhaps the numbers aren't adding up any more. They never did, of course, otherwise they'd all be in profit, not debt-ridden.
On a more cheerful note, what's the betting that we win at Old Trafford? Just the sort of bizarre result football turns up, I suppose, although bread and butter wins would be more welcome.
In Gerry Francis's first season, we couldn't win to save our lives, although everyone said how well we played. Then we stuffed United at OT and we did end up in the top half, in 5th position eventually, if I remember rightly, although maybe not that season.
So that's OK.