I think it's over for David Moyes at Manchester United. I believe many other people at the club feel that, too.
In the days and hours since the Liverpool defeat on Sunday, I think even Moyes has come to believe his chance of building a new dynasty at
the Old Trafford giants has gone.
I only have anecdotal evidence for that - and Moyes insisted
at his Tuesday press conference that nothing about his future had changed - so it will have to remain as opinion, not fact.
I hope there is still time for events to prove me wrong.
I hope that
United beat Olympiakos tomorrow and progress to the Champions League quarter-finals.
I hope that, somehow, there can still be some dramatic turnaround and that Moyes survives, then prospers.
The evidence, though, suggests that some time between now and the start of next season, the club will fire the man they entrusted to succeed Sir Alex Ferguson.
Through all United's troubles this season, many have stuck to the idea that the club would give Moyes time, as they once gave Ferguson time.
It was a nice idea. It appealed to the romantic in all of us. It appealed to the belief that United were a club who would do things right.
United, many maintained, were an island of old-fashioned, long-term thinking in football.
They had given Moyes a six-year contract. It was a statement of loyalty and they would abide by it. They would accept that whoever followed Ferguson had a hell of a job on his hands and they would give him at least 18 months to start getting it right.
That feeling has gone now.
Its last glimmer was snuffed out with
the manner of defeat to Liverpool.
This is not 1986.
The Glazers have bills to pay. Big bills. Other elite clubs - Chelsea, Real Madrid, Manchester City, Barcelona - would have acted already.
The Glazers think they have been patient. Now patience has run out.
When Moyes goes, he will be lampooned as the man who blew Ferguson's inheritance, the man who could not handle the step up.
The reality is that he is not to blame for what has happened at United this season - most of their fans would accept that there are much wider issues at play here.
Ferguson acted as an apologist for the Glazers for too long. He accepted under-investment in the club's playing resources. He was a genius as a man-manager. He got by.
But the fact is that until Moyes bought Marouane Fellaini last summer, United had not recruited a genuine central midfielder since the summer of 2007, when Ferguson signed Owen Hargreaves and Anderson.
The playing staff stagnated. United remained reliant on Paul Scholes and Ryan Giggs for way too long. Three of the starting back four bequeathed to Moyes will depart the club this summer, too.
So Moyes was not just given the task of following the most successful manager in English football history, he was presented with a massive rebuilding job, too - and paired with a rookie chief executive, Ed Woodward, to help him do it.
Anyone who thinks that is a recipe for a smooth transition is living in a fantasy world.
It is easy to say now, but the succession to Ferguson was poorly handled by the club. They were in thrall to Sir Alex to such an extent that there appeared to have been precious little planning for the future.
Surely Ferguson was at the club long enough to have been able to establish the kind of boot room culture that served Liverpool so well.
Why was Gary Neville allowed to leave for Sky TV so easily? Why was Ryan Giggs not promoted earlier? Why was Roy Keane allowed to become an enemy of the club rather than one of its greatest assets?
Ferguson's autocratic style prevented the assimilation of new blood and the proper grooming of a successor.
Moyes was given just one summer to stage a revolution. He never made it beyond the first of the barricades.
And now, as United wrestle with the idea of abandoning their principles by firing their boss after eight months, one fact stands out: Moyes never had a chance.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/its-over-david-moyes-manchester-3257483