LESS then a month ago, at the other end of Brian Clough Way, Football League clubs voted to amend Financial Fair Play (FFP) rules.
But it is events in the capital, over the coming months, that could yet still have an influence on the future of FFP, following that November meeting at Derby County.
Nottingham Forest are preparing themselves to work within the new set of guidelines that were approved by their fellow Championship clubs in that meeting at Pride Park.
They are operating on the presumption that the new guidelines will still be implemented. That will mean an 'embargo' of sorts, although it will not prevent the Reds from making two signings immediately, when the January transfer window opens, if they want to do so.
With the club already resigned to the fact they breached the allowed losses of £8m during the 2013/14 season, they must cut back considerably if they are to avoid facing further sanctions next season as well, with the allowable losses for the current campaign set at just £6m.
But, if Queens Park Rangers successfully pursue legal action against a fine of potentially more than £50m they face for breaching FFP guidelines last season, it could yet change the picture considerably.
A line would be drawn in the sand and the Football League could, in theory, find themselves open to a legal challenge from those clubs who find themselves punished this January, by being placed under that embargo.
There remain a host of 'ifs', 'whats' and 'maybes'. But it is a situation Forest are monitoring carefully.
What is certain is QPR's intent to challenge their punishment, despite threats from the Football League that they would face relegation to the Conference if they were to drop out of the Premier League this season, while refusing to pay that fine.
But any case is unlikely to be heard until the summer, which leaves the Football League in a potentially tough position, in the meantime, if a private agreement cannot be agreed with the London club.
QPR, like every other club who played in the Championship last season, were asked to submit their accounts to the Football League by December 1, for assessment.
It is not clear when the authorities will announce which clubs will face sanctions as a result of breaching those guidelines. Forest have not been informed when that will happen.
But it will have to be in the next few weeks as the 'embargo' will begin during the next window, starting on January 1.
Whatever happens surrounding QPR, those guidelines are now less severe than they were when they were initially drawn up.
The latest changes, ironically, were encouraged largely by the Premier League, with clubs concerned they would have no chance whatsoever of falling without the proposed limits, were they to be relegated into the Championship.
And the new blueprint will fall more in line with the rules in the top flight, which will now allow Championship clubs to sustain greater losses, which will be judged over a three year period, rather than one.
Tellingly, the 'embargo' rules have also been relaxed, to a point where Forest will still be able to add to their squad in January, albeit only through loan signings or free transfer acquisitions.
Forest currently will have a squad of 22 'established' first team professionals, come January, and the new rules will allow them to have 24 such players on the wage bill. That squad of 22 does not include current loan signings Jack Hunt and Tom Ince, who will see their deals expire before then.
Forest can bring in two new signings, either as free transfers or loan signings, from January 1, as long as the total cost, per player, does not exceed £600,000 per year. There can be no transfer or loan fee involved.
When other costs are taken into account, it amounts to a wage of roughly £10k a week.
For Forest, then, it will not change the picture too dramatically, beyond the fact that owner Fawaz Al Hasawi, who has been generous in his backing, will not be permitted to put his hand in his pocket again, to finance another big money addition.
Given that Stuart Pearce was planning only minor tinkering, rather than wholesale changes, in January, it will not alter the landscape hugely.
His job will be more difficult, without the option of paying a fee – even for a loan signing. But it will not be impossible.
The restrictions might make the loan market more of a viable option, but the Reds boss will still have options.
He will also, with a little luck, be bolstered by the return of both Andy Reid and Jack Hobbs, from injury, by the time January comes around.
They will feel like new signings in themselves.
Forest – who already possess a strong squad – will also be able to make further additions on a one in, one out basis. Although there are significant caveats involved there as well.
The most important of which is the fact Forest will only be able to spend 75 per cent of the money saved on wages, on the wages of a new signing.
If they have to pay off a player's contract to move him on, rather than him being transferred to another club, those wages will not be regarded as being saved.
In other words, Forest cannot simply pay off the contract of Algerian outcast Djamel Abdoun and use that money to bring in a new player.
If a player goes out on loan, however, his wages can be used to bring in another signing.
Confused? It gets more complex yet. Because the impact of the embargo, oddly, could be felt further down the chain.
For example, as a player over the age of 21, who has currently made four first team starts, if Forest start Stephen McLaughlin again this season he would then be considered an 'established' member of the squad.
That may be good news for Notts County, where the 24-year-old Irish winger is currently making a big impact on loan. Forest may decide he is better off maintaining his development at Meadow Lane, rather than taking up a place in the squad at the City Ground.
The same rules could also impact on fellow Magpies loan signing Louis Laing and on Dutch striker Lars Veldwijk, for the same reasons, as they are yet to make five starts for the club and, by doing so, garner 'established' status.
Furthermore, any new signing Forest make, of any age, will automatically be considered as an 'established' player, once they sign a professional contract.
So, if the head of the Forest academy, Gary Brazil, wanted to sign a highly rated 17 or 18-year-old, he would not be able to do so on professional terms – only on scholarship or apprentice contracts. Although, oddly, Forest can pay transfer fees for players they sign on a scholarship or apprentice basis.
If Forest can prove they have got back to within the loss guidelines in the summer, they would be able to sign players as normal once more. If not, they would remain under embargo. But that is a long way off.
Because, while QPR continue their fight against their multi-million pound fine, there remains several big questions to be asked over the future of FFP.
But, even presuming the rules are enforced as planned, only one question remains significant where Forest are concerned.
Will this damage their chances of winning promotion to the Premier League?
We will know the answer to that for certain in May but, for now, it feels as though it's impact should not be decisive.
