The possession football we played under LVG was pointless though, we passed the ball around in slow motion only to lose it and concede on the counter. Do you want us to go back to the LVG days? If not, then it's a completely disingenuous point.
Lopetegui has what pedigree exactly? He's shown in his career that he can get a lesser team playing good football, but when given a chance to do it with a top team he failed utterly, lasting 2 months at Real Madrid. That's a much better predictor of how things would go here than him getting Wolves to play some decent stuff. It's the same with Potter, he did well at Brighton, as part of a setup designed to get the best out of his style of football, but then he took over a bigger team in Chelsea, that had been assembled without that in mind, and had the worst points return for a manager in the club's history. Given that he'd be coming here, to a team similarly unsuited, but under even more pressure, his Chelsea performance is a much better indicator of how he'd perform.
You tried to deflect to me making excuses for Ten Hag, but that's irrelevant to the point. If we're going to sack him immediately and bring in a caretaker, it needs to be someone who hasn't got a track record of failure, and only failure, at big clubs, which Potter and Lopetegui both have. Otherwise it's nothing more than a wild punt, which is the short sighted approach I've been against from the start.
The Ange example is a reasonable one, it shows that it is possible for a manager to come in and overhaul a team's style very quickly, but again the circumstances are quite different. He came into a job with basically a free hit, there were rock bottom expectations and very little pressure, even though Spurs spent more under him that summer than we have during either summer with Ten Hag.
As for your last paragraph, it's objectively false. You and I have had this conversation before, and I've named managers (Nagelsmann, Rose, for example) who look like they could take the changes Ten Hag has made so far and run with them. My position on who it should be has softened quite a lot given that the new footballing regime seem like they know what they're doing, so I'll get behind whoever they bring in (if they decide to do so) as long as it looks like it's part of a plan and fits into a bigger picture stylistically. I'd even be OK with a caretaker if they fit the aforementioned criteria. What I'm dead against is your suggested approach of throwing any random manager at the job who's made a lesser team play well under comparatively easy circumstances, but hasn't demonstrated anything that would suggest they could do the same at a huge club under intense pressure, or in the cases of your two named suggestions, have demonstrated resoundingly that they aren't capable of that.
