The articles make some very good points. I'm 50/50 on Mourinho for reasons I'll mention, but I think we need to stick with him.
Firstly, the problems with the club are deep rooted. As the article points out, since Fergie has left, we've had 3 managers, all of which have different styles of play and want their own type of player. Changing the manager just leads to another overhaul of the squad, big losses and starting again. It's to late now, but we need to hire managers that fit a profile, rather than hiring the biggest name we can get. Going forward, at least this means better use of players we sign from past managers.
Secondly, We need to back the manager. Mourinho has spent big money, their is no denying that, but it does almost feel a bit late. The last years of Fergie and the Moyes season, we penny pinched and we were left with an underwhelming team. Mourinho has a profile, and we are building towards that, so changing the manager now would just be 2 steps backwards, but we need to fully back him, not half arsed. As much as we have spent, City have spent more, and Liverpool are catching up the VVD and Keita deals, so they are showing intent. Right now, we are a bigger club with bigger profits, so we should be outspending Liverpool.
One thing I will say is, we are second in the league, vast improvements, so the only reason we are having these discussions is because of how well City are playing, it's that simple. If they were having a similar season to last, we'd be sitting top and going that we are finally back.
Thing is though, City are doing what they are doing, and if we want to compete, that is the standard we need to look at (Obviously this season has been exceptional for them and may not be repeated). They've recruited better than us, they've back the managers and right now, they are reaping the rewards.
There is a lot of luck involved when it comes to transfers though. When we signed Falcao, we expected big things, same with Di Maria, Mhki, and so on. These players just never did it. City made signings like Sterling, Stones, Sane, Jesus etc, and they've just clicked. The players we bought weren't bad, they just didn't work for us.
One thing I will say though, I think some of the players at City are only performing to the standard they are due to how they play. They defend from the front and attack from the back. Stones doesn't need to defend as much as he would at other clubs, and Sterling is putting up great numbers, but is he really that good, or is he just playing in a team that gives him the freedom due to how high and aggressive they play. (Not saying Stones and Sterling are bad players btw) As a unit, City defend with everybody and attack with everybody.
In contrast, we play completely different. We are quite rigid in our player. Our defenders defend, our attacks attack and thats about it. Unlike City, who have people running beyond the ball. Walker, Sterling, Silva etc, our players stay in line or behind the ball. We are not adventurous at all. I think we are a better team than we are showing, even while sitting in second place. We defend first and attack later. We see clueless going forward at times.
Personally, I'd love Poch here. I think he'd serve up for entertaining football. I think he'd get better out of some of our attacking players, but switching and changing every other season is really hindering us
I need to stop because nobody reads these long posts anyway