I hope you are right, but to me Manchester United are the biggest club in the world and any manager should be prepared crawl over broken glass for that job if they had any faith in themselves.
I don't think it works like that though with people that are smart about their careers. A big part of being successful is about picking the right opportunity that suits your skills, cultural preferences, capability within structures etc etc.
There are innovators and there are maintainers. Poch is an innovator. Or to put it another way, the people that thrive in tech start ups to not thrive in bigger enterprises unless they are a rare breed. It is a different skill set, but there's many examples of a start up hiring a big name thinking that they will be perfect for them, but that person being wholly unsuited to the day to day. Similarly there are plenty of companies that try to hire 'cool' people from the start up world to help them transform digitally, but these people that are used to moving at breakneck speed in early stage companies end up getting caught in red tape. Too many layers of management need to have their say and their approval to get anything done.
In football I see it similar. I don't subscribe to good managers and bad managers. I subscribe to managers finding the right fit, which is often luck, and then being successful. Like I think Di Canio could have been a good manager somewhere. Different clubs have different challenges, environments, cultures, squads, ways of doing things and to get all of that right requires a lot of strategic thinking when making a managerial appointment.
Levy didn't plan this 15 years ago, but I think through so many failures he finally uncovered the right formula. We are probably 6th in terms of wealth in the league, but we give a good platform for youth, and we like attacking football. I think his original idea (or certainly since Arnesen) has been to get a manager that implements a system that performs greater than the sum of its parts, because that is how we will compete. So Santini has a system, but doesn't satisfy the demands for attacking, so one of the three pillars of our strategy doesn't work. Jol was attacking, but too tactically lax. Ramos had a system, attacked, but couldn't speak English. Harry was English, attached, but was too tactically lax. AVB had a system, but didn't trust youth and demanded too much money for unrealistic signings. Sherwood attached, trusted youth, but was too tactically lax.
I think finally, after all of that, we got someone that attacks, knows the Premier League, trusts in youth, plays attacking football and at the same time has a system that makes the whole greater than the parts. So every strategic advantage we can leverage is taken care of and used to its maximum, rather than compromising one essential part. And I think Poch knows this. I can see him being our Wenger, who surely had offers bigger than Arsenal through his time but stayed because of his belief in a greater project.
We can apply this thinking to other clubs and almost predict who will be successful, but it is why I am so confident about Spurs. Man United can spend and the my attack, and they have a culture of longevity. Moyes had longevity but compromised the other two. LVG had longevity but again was too much of a compromise of other strategic advantages. If Poch goes there, he'd have longevity, he'd attack, but their desire to be box office means he'd had to contend with players that won't run as hard, and so his advantage - and what makes him good here - doesn't work. Either the club or the manager would have to change, where as he could and will stay here because he knows it's the right place.
