Ange approached our job with the wrong mentality. He should have come in and had a healthy dose of humility, knowing that Levy had given him a great career opportunity. He could have approached the role knowing that he was the one that had a load to learn about the PL environment. Unfortunately, he didn't. He acted like some sort of messiah. He preached to everyone and made out he was going to polish our club up and make it good again. We were the broken ones and he was Mr Fixit. That meant that he himself was not open to feedback and he wasn't listening and observing what was happening with his own product. It wasn't working and he's unfortunately ended up looking like the emperor with no clothes on.
No problem with arrogance in certain roles in life, but this was massively over-rotated arrogance and not enough humility in my opinion.
He did leaven the messianic message with some self-deprecation, I think. I am not sure the "humility approach" would have worked for someone who was the umpteenth manager tasked with changing the culture of the club.
Donkeys' years ago when there was a senior management regime change at the company for which I worked, my department got a new director who was much taken with Japanese management techniques (many of which were instilled by US and UK consultants post-war) - a focus on quality, employee empowerment & engagement, endless bloody tracking of whether we were hitting our quality targets, and all that stuff. Because we were typical Brits, we initially responded with the usual "yeah, yeah, yeah, whatever" and took the tinkle out of him behind his back.
He was not deterred by this and just kept banging on and on and on and on about his management beliefs, and blow me, after a while we found ourselves spouting management slogans such as "what gets measured, gets accomplished", "do it right first time", "we criticise ideas, not people" and "I didn't get where I am today without knowing a quality circle when I see one".
That last one might be lost on a lot of you and is a joke for the Reggie Perrin fans.
In short, he achieved buy-in through being an obsessive taco, and to give the guy credit, quality did improve massively.
Now, possibly the key phrase here is "what gets measured, gets accomplished" because in football, it is a lot easier than in most businesses to measure whether a philosophy is working or not. Many of the metrics suggest the Ange philosophy is working but the most important one - points per game - indicates it is not, which makes it a lot harder to sustain buy-in.
There's a character in the poker-based film The Cincinnati Kid who plays to a system that proves ultimately unsuccessful, and he says something to the effect of, "the bet was correct, it was the cards that were wrong", which I think is where we are at with Ange now.
Most fans have decided he is not the messiah, he's a very naughty boy.
We're all hoping that one of the future managerial appointments will prove to be the messiah but we're probably going to be forever disappointed. Right now, I guess most of us would settle for someone who is simply better than Ange. The transfer window is closed, maybe we could get 'Arry in for the rest of the season to tell the boys to "fakhin' run about a bit". Or rent the job out on a weekly basis to billionaires who have always wanted to coach a Premiership team.
In summary, I think that to have the best chance of achieving his aims, Ange had to go all "my way or the highway", and given his success in other (way less challenging) leagues, it was a reasonable posture to adopt. Having gone all in on drawing to an inside straight and failing, he now seems to have little option but to try his luck elsewhere.
On the plus side, Aston Villa have shown that misguidingly putting your faith in a manager who's had success with one of the Glasgow clubs need not be terminal.