There are many examples of teams with far less potential having far greater success, I have already mentioned Wigan and there are others such as Fulham, Blackburn & Bolton, far smaller concerns and far more successful.
This is the bit (from many, not just Donny) that I really struggle with sometimes. More potential how exactly? And what the hell is 'potential' anyway? How do you quantify it? (guru type equations aside). Because we won the European Cup 30 years ago? OK. But Blackburn won the Premier League 15 years ago. Fulham has the whole West London thing in it's favour.
What is it, exactly, that means Forest has 'more potential' than Bolton, Wigan et al? Other clubs are of similar size with similar sucessess in their own dim and distant past; Leeds, Sheffield Weds, QPR, Preston, Huddersfield etc aren't setting the world on fire either. 20 years from now I dare say Wigan might be back in second / third tier. Maybe even banging on about their glories of reaching the Premier League in 00's.
I just don't get the whole 'Forest should be bigger / better' or has
more 'potential' argument. 77-95 was 18 years of exception in the grand scheme of things, not the rule.
That's not to say I'm paricularly happy with our seemingly dreary plight at the moment, but nor do we have some kind of 'right' to more because of our 'grand status' either.