It was an unusual feeling as I waited for the train to Norwich on Saturday.

I wasn't looking forward to the game. I just felt empty.

Barring a miracle, City's hopes of making the play-offs this season are over. It was a game of little consequence.

I'm also disappointed with the players for performing so poorly that the manager has been sacked.

The two goals we scored barely raised a smile from me. I don't think I was alone in my apathy – the atmosphere at Carrow Road matched the dull, low-key fare on the pitch.

Hours before kick-off, the club had announced how it would be structured in the future.

This sparked chatter about who would be the sporting director, how much say the head coach will have on transfer targets and whether this model has ever worked in this country before.

The trouble is, the answer to all of those questions as fans is that we don't know.

We won't have a say on who gets what job, and with the definition of the sporting director role, there's a strong chance few of us will have heard of the person that eventually fills it.

We'll never know if the head coach has much of a say on player recruitment because such matters are never publically disclosed.

As for whether this structure has ever worked in English football, that's a topic for the pub and has no definitive answer.

I have no idea if this model will work, but I'm willing to give it a try.

I don't know who should take on these jobs. My overriding feeling is of worry. The decisions the board make in the spring of 2017 could determine whether we are Championship mid-table mediocrity – or worse – for the next decade or back in the Premier League.

There's a lot at stake and I live in hope they get it right.

Until there are people in place, I think it is inevitable that the actual football will feel like an irrelevant sideshow.

That empty feeling will remain with me on matchdays while this season stumbles towards its conclusion.