THE word of the week for me is a simple one… consistency.
Consistency is the one thing, more than anything else, that Nottingham Forest need right now.
Forget about Financial Fair Play and transfer embargoes (although we will come to that later), because neither will really impact on their promotion hopes this season.
No, the deciding factor for me is consistency in team selection and, just as importantly, consistency where the manager's office is concerned.
We all know that Forest owner Fawaz Al Hasawi gets a little twitchy at this time of the year, as proved when he sacked Sean O'Driscoll on Boxing Day two years ago.
And, a few years prior to that, under the tenure of Nigel Doughty, it was Colin Calderwood who got his marching orders the day after Christmas.
This is not traditionally a good time for Forest managers – but that is one tradition I do not want to see maintained this time around.
If you include caretaker bosses, there have been 14 different managers at Forest over the past decade, including two spells for Billy Davies. That is far too many.
Even if you do not include caretaker managers, Stuart Pearce is the tenth man to take on the role in the past ten years. He is also the sixth manager since Al Hasawi arrived at the City Ground in July 2012.
We do not need a seventh, not when Pearce has not yet had six months in which to stamp his influence on the side.
Yes, Forest have won only two games in 14 Championship outings. But let's see how the season pans out, before we rush to any rash decisions.
But there is one habit I would love to see the Reds – and Pearce – get themselves into.
In the three matches coming up over the Christmas period, Forest must pick their best team and stick with it. Nothing more, nothing less.
Injuries and suspensions aside, forget about tinkering; about tactical changes to reflect the nuances of the opposition side – and just pick your best side, Stuart.
When confidence is a bit low, when results are hard to come by, putting your faith in a group of players can be a good way of giving them belief; of sending out the message that you have faith in them.
Pearce has not tinkered too much with the back-four lately, only bringing in Kelvin WIlson for Jamaal Lascelles at Rotherham, which may or may not have been for football reasons – and they kept a clean sheet at Rotherham.
The issue was up front, where Forest lacked cutting edge.
But changing personnel is not always the best way of finding that. Giving a team time to gel can be just as important.
My reference point is my own experience at Forest. Football has changed massively, I know that – and it would not be possible now. But the successes we had were largely achieved through a group of 16 or so players.
That would be impossible now, but the theory remains the same. Many managers seem to change things for the sake of change sometimes.
But, with tough games coming up against Leeds at home, at Middlesbrough on Boxing Day and versus Birmingham at the City Ground after that, consistency really could help.
I am convinced it will when it comes to the manager. Pearce needs time to continue the good work he has done so far. Most Forest fans would agree with that, I suspect. It needs to be remembered that it is normally only the more negative among supporters who make the loudest noise, particularly with the rise of social media.
There is a demand for immediate success – and a belief among many that change is the only option, if and when that does not happen.
Forest have a good team. A win against Leeds would be a good start. A few good results against Boro and Birmingham would be an even better end to 2014.
And there are more questions than answers where Financial Fair Play and the transfer embargo situation is concerned.
Yes, Forest have breached the guidelines that they knew were in place, by losing more money than they were allowed to lose last season.
They broke the rules and they were punished, rightly, as a result of that. But my issue is that there is seemingly still so much doubt hanging over the rules themselves.
QPR, currently, are contesting whether they should pay a £50m+ fine for breaching spending limits themselves, last season, as they made the step up into the Premier League. If they are successful, it will, in theory, open up the floodgates for every other club punished under FFP rules, to do the same.
Whether other clubs are fined or put under a transfer embargo, the QPR situation will have set a precedent for everyone who is punished under FFP rules, to make their own legal challenge.
And the rules are set to change again anyway, at the end of next season. In the meantime, Forest, Leeds and Blackburn have been hit by a transfer embargo that isn't an embargo. Confused anyone?
Surely the best thing for the Football League to do would have been to postpone any kind of sanctions or punishments until the QPR situation was resolved?
To me, it is a great idea to protect the financial safety of clubs. But it has been very, very poorly executed.
