"Fully back him" is a vague term. What does it mean? Does it mean that the board has to "give everything he needs" as showing as "fully"?
You back the manager, but there's no board in the history of the game would give "everything the manager needs". And I don't think any manager expecting that way also.
Even the City board doesn't give "everything he needs" to Pep. It's a balance of giving some investment, see how the manager does with the investment, then give him some more.
I think the board has been backing Mourinho good enough, as any big club would do.
I think I pretty much said previously I think the board backed Mourinho well so far so that's not the point of discussion.
The point of discussion is the logic of the board not signing the players the manager wants because of age profile or something like that, which is a straight recipe to a disaster.
So you hire a manager, then don't believe in his approach and don't agree on the profile of the players he wanted, so you don't sign them, than the manager moans about lack of transfers, the manager implodes with the team in a meltdown this season and gets sacked while blaming the board.
A straightforward way to destroy a season and just speaks poorly about the board not the manager in this case. If you don't agree on his approach or the profile of players he wants, why the hell hire him and pay him a giga salary of money ? It means the club is poorly managed and organized.
If you don't want the manager to be in control of the team, hire him as a football coach only and have a DOF that is responsible for determining the transfers needed, like Madrid.
But getting the manager then letting him ask for players then refuse them because you don't like their profile and don't sign anyone, how can't you see the consequences of this ?
You surely know the approach this manager has used throughout his career and the players he prefers so what's the surprise now? Don't act like you didn't know when you hired him.
In case of Mourinho we all know he's defensive oriented manager who depends on physicality and counters in his playstyle. The board knew that very well when they hired him. It's really not a surprise the way he sets the team to play in certain occasions or the players he prefers. It's known for everyone who watched some football. Same for Pep in City or any other big manager.
An no, City has provided Pep with everything he wanted, and he had a role in every transfer. City had no problem signing Bravo to be shifted to bench later, signing Nolito to sell him next summer or signing a 50m B.Silva to set on the bench. When they withdrew from Sanchez deal, Pep had a say in it. The only English club in which the manager isn't in good control is Chelsea.
If the board hires certain manager then that's because they think his approach and profile suits the club and when this manager asks for certain profile of players to be signed, the board is supposed to fully back him with this profile as they already believed in it when they hired him
Again, I think Ed did a very good job for Mourinho so far so I'm not talking about this specific case. I'm talking in general about your logic.
