Porto & Inter, incredible results for Mourinho in the CL and rightly lauded for it, but they were the best/most invested-in teams in their domestic leagues, used to winning week in week out and as a result all pulling in the same direction/feeling unbeatable, of course Mourinho would have helped foster that attitude and harness it in to performance in Europe but he was not going to build that foundation at Spurs as we weren't a top side domestically, he's never done that without being the richest in the league and at United he spent more than anyone i think and still couldn't do it there either - like i say that's not to take away from it but a different situation to managing a team that's performing around 6th in their league with a similar level of investment -i don't think he's doing a particularly good job at Roma, on course for a second Con League qualification in Serie A, not good really and more or less the same level we were performing at with a similar level of club - Con League win fair enough, they were favourites and barely played a team of note all the way through the tournament but he got it won so done what he had to. He didnt win a trophy at the first club he managed either iirc an often forgotten fact when the only club he never won a trophy with line gets trotted out.
As for Conte, great league manager, again when at the richest in the league and as long as you don't mind doing nothing of note in the cups at the same time - he has his spells at smaller clubs in Italy when starting out which showed he could do the nitty gritty so was cause for optimism that he could bring some of that here, but a combination of the football he plays and the toxic atmosphere that quickly settles in from the relentless blame game he plays means he rarely lasts long at clubs since those early years - Inter, Chelsea and now Spurs shows there's a pattern with him.
More testing is probably the wrong wording tbf, different test/different circumstances would be better i guess - working at the richest club in the league and succeeding doesn't mean the skills required there will translate to other clubs further down the food chain (and vice versa tbf)
I equally find it tiring to read it that these managers can't be questioned / it's all on the players/the club because of what they have achieved at bigger/richer clubs previously - i only judge a manager here on what they do here and try to weigh that against the circumstances in which they are working. i think there are many legitimate points that are argued well regarding both managers use of tactics and (what can only be assumed from the outside) coaching.
We aren't a top side and we are well off of where we should be but we've been at this level previously and had less prestigious managers have us playing well and getting everyone pulling in the same direction - it's simply not an excuse that i buy.
