It's been 13 years since we won the Premier League. We're clearly in a rebuilding process, which we've restarted over and over for the last 13 years. We've had 11 different managers, including 7 interims, over that 13 year period. 6 managers who's been here for 1-3 years.
Everyone praised Klopp as a great manager at Liverpool, but he actually spent 5 years there before winning the Premier League in an asterisk season, and was unable to replicate it after.
Now, if Klopp is a better manager than all the managers we've had since SAF, why do we get rid of all our managers before they get to complete their version of the rebuild? Every manager is stuck with many of the previous manager's players through their stay here. Is that a result of fan demand to change managers to quickly?
If we look at Ole's stay here, he improved our results every season, despite having less backing than everyone else in the transfer market. Ole was also very unlucky with the Pogba situation. An expensive player who's rarely available, but still holds a salary and a midfield slot as soon as he was available. This was poorly handled by the office for sure. And bringing in a Cristiano way past his prime disrupted the balance. Top clubs dont bring in players way past their prime.
The reason I point out Ole is the same reason why I like the thought of Carrick getting time to prove himself, namely the fact that they're both loyal to the club! If we succeed with a Nagelsmann, how long will he stay? Do we need a new manager after a couple of years? That's not the recipe for building a dynasty. If we succeed with Carrick, we've got a manager for 20 years! The upside of winning with Carrick is so much bigger!
Tldr: are we as fans too impatient? Are we too quick to think it's been 13 years, disregarding the fact we've not given a single manager more than 3 years since then?