Debatable.
We haven't done it post Fergie so it hard to know what the owners would think.
I guess, but what do you think the mood would be like on here if we finished top four a few years in a row without winning anything? I reckon after one season, fine, beyond that, people would be after the manager's head.
LVG was effectively gone half way through his secnd season, after finishing 4th in his first. Mourinho won two trophies then finished second, yet by the time he went into his third year most fans wanted him out, and if you believe the media so did Woodward.
There isn't really anything to suggest any of the top six other than Spurs and Arsenal would settle for the job Pochettino has done...and Arsenal might settle for it but their fans certainly don't.
Expectation and investment at United will be different than Spurs.
Pochettino achieved those success with significant lower expenditure than other top six rivals. It is not rocket science to assume that with a larger investment in his squad, he will do better. Pep has the first billion dollar squad and look how successful he is. Poch doesn’t need that much investment, he just need what we have given most of our manager post sir Alex to achieve a better standings and result. I don’t know why some fans find that so hard to understand. Money = success.
When people also start talking about Poch recent run, Klopp in his last season had Dortmund near bottom. Yet Liverpool knew how talented he was and that investment paid of. United will be crazy to miss out on the next Klopp. We still have fans on here asking why we didn’t sign Klopp from Dortmund
See this argument doesn't really work. Lampard has spent nothing at Chelsea. Ole has significantly less net spend this summer than Pochettino...do you think the expectation on these two will be lower as a result? Do you think either would be in a job in 4 years time if they win nothing in that period?
It is not rocket science to assume something you have no evidence either way for, because it is just guess work. You are guessing that Pochettino would be a better manager if he spent more money. He's had a good enough squad to challenge for trophies for years now. He has spent quite a lot of money in the summer. Can you honestly say any of the signings they've made look like improvements?
Klopp isn't really comparable to Pochettino. He made Dortmund one of the best teams in the world and won two league titles and a cup with them despite having to compete with Bayern. He was a proven winner when Liverpool brought him in. You can see very obvious improvement from one year to the next from Liverpool under him. None of this can be applied to Pochettino.
Here in lies the problem with the Pochettino opinions on here though. People pinning their hats on him being the person to be succesful at United, then just ignoring anything that suggests he might not be. Things such as the fact we already have a manager who is currently doing better than him with arguably a weaker set of players. If we were currently without a manager I wouldn't be against giving Pochettino a chance, but we have a manager, and even if we didn't Pochettino already has a club.
He also finished 2nd. And he did all this on a budget similar to the likes of Stoke and less than teams like West Ham during a new stadium rebuild, after having to completely restructure the squad after the AVB disaster. Why are you judging a manager of a club with the resources of Spurs, by the same bar as clubs with the resources of United or Chelsea? And yes, getting to a CL final is an achievement .. of course it is, he did it with Spurs.
He got us top 4 last season and in to a CL final. This season we've started poorly and our away form is horrible, clearly not all is right at the club. Yet season by season he's achieved his objectives and I wouldn't be surprised if we still make top 4 again (ahead of Ole) despite the problems at the club. The fact is that Pochettino has probably been at Spurs a little too long and things have become a tad stale, especially due to lack of real investment over the years, and that's taking its toll. It would on any manager, do you think Klopp or Guardiola would be world class without all the investment? Guardiola finished behind Poch in the league with stars like Aguero, De Bruyne, Sterling etc .. he needed another couple of hundred mill to get where he is.
So you wanna judge Poch by the same standards as Klopp and Guardiola, even though he's had far less in terms of resources? How is that fair? If I think Howe is great, do I judge him by the same standards as Pochettino too? Context is always important, and the situation at Spurs for Poch hasn't always been at all easy, he's had nowhere near the backing the managers at top clubs get. Only this summer did we see any genuine investment and we're yet to see that on the pitch because it's early days and 2/3 of them have been injured.
Poch has done incredible work for us and took us to places nobody would have predicted (runners up in the prem, cl final, top 4 every single season etc) when he took charge of a club in a real state. If/when he goes he will be applauded by the fans for what he did for us, even if we think it's time to part ways, and if he goes to a club with real backing he will win trophies and be a success, of that I have zero doubt.
I am judging him by the same standards as I would judge any manager who people claim to be one of the best or think should manage a team like United. There are massive double standards on here with Pochettino. Lampard is managing Chelsea on a transfer budget of roughly -£90m. Ole has a net spend of what, £60m? to rebuild a mess of a squad. Do you think either of these will keep their job if their team is sitting in 11th place with a third of the season to go? If you are going by this line of argument then technically Eddie Howe is right up there and Guirdiola has proven nothing.
He has done a good job at Spurs, IF you think of Spurs as a team that are lucky to finish in the top four. If you think of them as a team in the same bracket as the other top six, which if you listen to the likes of Gladston is certainly what the ambition is, then he isn't doing such a great job. He's doing the same job that Wenger was doing at Arsenal, minus the FA cup wins...the job Wenger was doing which resulted in protests at games and calls for him to be sacked.
Getting to the Champions League final is only an achievement if you like nearly winning things, but not winning them. I've watched us lose two CL finals. I'm not sure I considered it an achievement. It was nice to get to them, I suppose. I've heard argument slike this cementing Tottenham as a big team, or being the cornerstone for them to build on. This is a load of nonsense. It didn't help Arsenal in 2007. It didn't help Monaco in 2004. It doesn't seem to be much help to Tottenham going by their performances this season.
It really baffles me when people use this investment or expectation argument in favour of Pochettino, when actually it's the double standards the other way that make the perception of him as some kind of managerial god on here so daft. He's done a decent job at Spurs. I'm not denying that. A very good job initially, but at the end of the day what he's done there doesn't prove he would be a good manager at a club where the expectation is to win things and be the best team.
The job he's doing at present isn't even good enough for Spurs, and that has been the case for nearly 10 months now. Yet it has not even made a dent in the unrelenting bollocks talked about him on here. What you have on here is a bunch of United fans who basically want our manager to be sacked so he can replaced with another manager who has done significantly worse during the same period of time, despite having a stronger squad. That's how blinded people seem to get by nonsense and presumptions.
