Sven-Goran Eriksson's emergence as Manchester City's prime managerial target will be greeted by a wave of indifference from those who inhabit Eastlands on a regular basis.
Eriksson has held talks with the club's proposed buyer, former Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, and seemingly his influential advisor Keith Harris.
The current City regime prefers eminently more sensible targets such as Sevilla's Juande Ramos, who I understand is still registering interest in succeeding Stuart Pearce.
Or if they cannot land Ramos, a team-builder who will restore City on sensible foundations.
So is it an ill-judged move appointing Eriksson? I suspect so.
Eriksson is a strange option for City's new owners to take.
Privately, he was being firmly ruled out of the equation, along with Gerard Houllier, just a few short weeks ago.
Now he is not just back in the race, he is leading the way towards the finishing line.
Surely Thaksin's camp would be wise to listen to those who are still holding the reins at City, those with a greater feel for the club and its followers than the Thai and his cohorts?
Eriksson does not look a comfortable fit as City's new boss.
City's present owners have put together their own identikit boss - namely a European who would nurture and work with the club's outstanding academy.
Eriksson has an enviable record of domestic success at Gothenburg, Benfica, Roma, Sampdoria and Lazio.
But is he a modernising team builder? Would he come near City if he was not enticed by the prospect of a huge transfer fund?
And as he approaches 60, would Eriksson have the hunger and drive to take on what is a rebuilding job as opposed to a minor makeover?
And then we come to the fact that Eriksson also has more baggage to handle than Heathrow Airport on a Bank Holiday weekend.
Eriksson's credibility was holed below the water line by his performance as England boss in the lead up to, and during, the World Cup in Germany last summer.
I had the dubious privilege of watching Eriksson in "action" in Germany - and a more lamentable and uninspiring figure would be hard to imagine.
From picking a ludicrously imbalanced squad, to his uninspiring tactics, wretched substitutions and all-round inertia, it was a dismal personal display gruesomely reflected by his England team.
By the end of the campaign he had become a mystifying figure of ridicule, a spent force.
And there has certainly been no rush to drag him out of his exile since he was, by any other name, sacked by the Football Association.
Eriksson's career in England has been accompanied by kiss-and-tell revelations and a clandestine meeting with Chelsea that somehow earned him a lucrative new deal from the FA.
He is a flawed figure who attracts a media feeding frenzy and will do so again.
Manchester City's own interests and profile could end up being a sideshow to the Eriksson circus. Not what they need at present.
And do City, as with Kevin Keegan, want another wounded former England manager to take charge?
It is a treacherous path for Thaksin to negotiate.
True, Eriksson can answer back with his record at club level throughout his career.
But as far as Thaksin and his confidantes are concerned, this is an area they should tread with care.