There is no doubting that they have spent the last 11 years firmly in our shadows in my opinion. Granted they might have spent two years in the PL whilst we were in the championship but generally when we've played one another we've generally had the upper hand, whilst we were in the same league we have always finished above them. All this has generated from that fantastic promotion in 2002. Had Wolves beaten us to promotion that season I think the whole outlook for both sides would have been different. Us beating them to promotion gave us the platform to build forward and although at times we've been annoyed with Peace and his so called tightness, there's no doubt these are our greatest years in long while, rounded off by the fact they're playing second fiddle to us.
Another argument I hear regularly from them is that we have an average squad. It really is laughable. In all of their recent PL seasons under MM they have scrapped their way to survival or have at least been aided by teams which have hardly spent or entered financial oblivion. Portsmouth I remember having a ten point deduction, Burnley appointed Laws after losing Owen Coyle and Hull City went on a massive massive slide, Blackpool are another which spent little. Blues in that second half the season were another which went on a negative slide. West Ham too were awful under Grant, realistically with the players they had they should never have been relegated. We have assembled a team of footballers, footballers which look comfortable playing in this division with managers who have tried to get them playing the right way. Wolves have over the MM years been based on effort and industry with quality playing second fiddle. There are only two players in that side which would at least add something to our side and they are Fletcher and Jarvis. Everyone else I would go nowhere near. That's the difference in quality between the two. Is Hennessey better than Foster? Is Berra better than McAuley? Is Johnson better than Olsson? Is Ward better than Ridgewell? Henry over Mulumbu? O'Hara over Morrison? Doyle over Odemwingie? Milijas over Dorrans? Hunt over Brunt? The answer is no.
Last season they had a chance to build on scrapping another survival. They didn't. They decided to come and wind us up about how our signings weren't good enough and how they were really going to push on now they signed Corberan Johnson. They had egg on their faces. They finished bottom, we were 10th. Some 20+ points above them, you thought they would have learned their lesson about mouthing off.
And finally, this Hodgson was a lucky appointment. We were in the middle of a terrible run and our chairman decided to do something about it. Hodgson/Hughton were both out of work, we sacked RDM and these two were quickly the favourites. We used something called initiative to snap up the best man to take us forward. There's nothing lucky about using your brain. On the other hand, Morgan tried something similar when he sacked MM last season, instead, he made a right pigs ear of it, appointed the assistant and look what happened. They became the laughing stock at England whilst we were flirting with the top ten.
That's the difference. We've strengthened our squad. Clarke will have to be pretty incapable if he manages to get this lot relegated.
I can't comment on the years previous as I was only a wee boy. I've grew up in this era when we've been the much better side between the two.
This is no doubt this is hurting them, everything we've done over them, and personally, I'm loving it.
