At the start of the season I thought that Leeds Leicester and Southampton had better squads than the rest of division. I also thought that Sheffield Wednesday, Rotherham and Huddersfield looked poor on paper. I thought the rest was very much of a muchness.
Given a competent coach who could get them playing to their strengths most of the rest could have decent seasons and with a little bit of good fortune avoiding injuries to key players (most don't have much by the way of depth) even a very good season by which I mean the play-offs.
Plainly regardless of what I or any other fan or pundit thinks about the relative strengths of the squads the proof is eventually revealed by results. How long can a squad under or over perform without us revisiting our views of their collective abilities? For instance Norwich and Watford started last season as favourites for a speedy return to the Premier League and have barely threatened to live up to that billing I suspect there are players trading on past performances and reputations that aren't entirely justified. Again I didn't believe QPR's squad were that bad but they were really poor when they came to the Hawthorns.
I still don't look at the Ipswich Town squad and think it is the 2nd best in the league. However they have maintained momentum, been able to field their preferred XI more often than not and very obviously have a coach who has them well organised in a system that plays to their strengths.
Coaching makes a difference which is why 6 Championship clubs have already fired their manager this season. Some switches make a huge difference think of the impact that Carrick and Corberan made last season although many don't and it remains to be seen what impact any of the changes owners have made this season has.
