Saul Goodman wrote:I get your point. Having a winning manager for 20 years is better than 4 winning managers for 5 years apiece.
Getting 10 years or so out of Pellegrini, if he does come and is successful, wouldnt be too bad.
if it's all about winning trophies , it doesn't matter how long a coach stays. Chelsea have proved that again. And we tonked them four times this season !
Mancini brought all the important things together and was very successful , perhaps beating expectations.
The chairnan has signalled a revolving door option from now on. He wants trophies every season.
There's no point in letting emotion affect your thoughts on the next manager, because any slip up means the next one will be brought in.
The idea of a Dynasty under one Manager is not the way ahead. Things worked in the rags favour to enable it. You've only got to look at other managers with a dynasty ,Moyes at Everton , won nowt, Wenger at the Arse... nowt in 7 (8 now ?) .
If for example, we got Messi. Barca would most likely win nothing for a few years until they regrouped and developed a new style of play, ( they weren't always tiki taki)
The danger is our Chairman has set a no tolerance of failure ( trophies must be won) policy . Holistic ? , just another bluff tactic.
Bringing on youngsters ? holistically ? we might get one or two. The dream of an entire team coming through the ranks , is just that, it will take a decade at least .Pixie and Dixie will be gone by then, found out , just like at Barca.
Roberto Mancini deserved another season to get more trophies under his belt, the Chairman let him down there.
Pellegrini ? i can't see it happening with him, but if it means we have Isco signed up for the next five years perhaps that is the price we pay.
For immediate gratification , only Jose will now do and i suppose i'll have to be quiet about Jose cos i can't stand his arrogance and negativity( style of play and tactics) but it has brought trophies.
