Quote Originally Posted by SWv2 View Post
Would that not change every year in line with the winner of the title?

Is a manager with a bottomless pit of money who delivers tangible success in the form of a trophy a better “manager” than his peer at a club with little or no finances or club infrastructure who manages to keep them competing with clubs of much bigger means?

It’s all a bit my dad is bigger than your dad to be honest.

Wenger is a very good manager. Pochetinno is a very good manager. One is arguably coming to the end of his days while the other is setting off on his path.

One manages a club with enormous resources, one of the top 10 in the world if we believe reports from industry specialists. The other does not. There is despite basic logic different expectations placed on both from their supporters.
Not necessarily the winning of the title. The concept of best manager is an opinion, which, if expressed, might take into account all of the factors you mention. In terms of pounds spent per point harvested, I expect Poch is running high amongst the top-ranked clubs over the last two seasons. Agreed that the stock of a manager fluctuates with the team's fortunes, and would add that those fortunes will depend also on players and the coaching, scouting and other staff.

Or maybe Dr Nerg is right and the Spurs players are just doing well because they are doping.