Liverpool still have Wijnaldum, Milner, Hendo playing CM. I am sure they would love Pogba and Kante. They still have weak points. Arsenal have weaknesses all over the shop as do Chelsea (no decent CF). Would love to know who all these rivals are.
2) Many managers sell before buying. Klopp had to sell Coutinho to finance a spending spree. Why do we still have Jones, Rojo, Bailly, Lindelöf when they are all average? Surely you cannot keep hoarding squad players?
3) Jose is one of the few managers that seem to be afforded the luxury of buying an entire new 1st 11. Most have to work with what they have by en large
1) They have bought Keita and Fabinho. The fact that Klopp doesn't want to introduce Fabinho now is his choice, but you can't say they didn't invest in midfield. They recognized they have a problem in it and got 2 top players in one summer in it. Chelsea also had a problem in midfield last season with Bakaoko and he got replaced with Kovacic and Jorginho. Just because you don't rate Giroud doesn't mean they're not happy with it, like people talking about Firmino while Klopp rates him highly. They have weak points they buy to strengthen it. Not to mention when Courtois was sold for 35m they have no problem in getting a young not much known keeper for a whole 72m. They didn't say: "Oh he's overexpensive, he doesn't deserve all that money" etc like we're doing with the likes of Maguire and Tobby for example.
Not sure why you're mentioning Arsenal though, thought we're talking about clubs who want to win.
2 ) How said that we didn't try to offload them ? We tried to offload Darmian and Rojo out in summer but refused to sell Darmian for less than 20m and Rojo deal to Everton fall apart because he didn't accept a pay cut. Both are things to blame Ed for, as I don't think managers put the required bid for a player to be sold and it was Ed who gave insane wage salaries to average players ever since LVG days, thus struggling to offload them as they refuse pay cuts. Maybe don't give stupid wages to average players from start then ?
3 ) No he's not. The other 2 clubs competing for the title have went on insane spending the last 2 summers. People keep talking about the 400m spent by us but City spent 300m alone on their defense and GK without talking about their offensive signings. Pep didn't have to put with the terrible, slow and aged defense and fullbacks he inherited and they were fully replaced in summer. Klopp didn't go to compete on league with Klaven, Lovren and Karius. They bought VVD for 75, they enforced the midfield with Keita and Fabinho for nearly 100m, and they got Alisson for 67m. You can talk about Coutinho sale but they have already exceeded the money they got for him.
Also not all of Klopp or Pep signings were hits when they first came to say that they earned it. Klopp's first summer was a big failure, only Mane was a good buy and the rest failed, and his first full season he barely secured top 4 and was about to miss on it for Arsenal in the last few matches. Pep's first summer wasn't much of a success at this time. Gundogan was injured ( and still inconsistent currently ), Stones was laughed at thanks to his price tag, Nolito and Bravo flopped badly and Jesus has ended on the bench and is on the dawn not on the up. Pretty much only Sane was considered a successful hit from this window, and later on Stones improved. Pep also had an overall terrible season, not even mounting a title challenge, out of both cups and out of 16th round CL by Monaco.
Now both Liverpool and City boards didn't go to them and tell them "Feck off you bricks, improve first before we splash the cash, and your targets are shite as well". Reason ? Because the board is spending to improve the team now and afterwards not just for the eyes of the current manager like we seem to think. The CB we vetoed to buy this summer because of the high wages, we'll be forced to do it with the upcoming manager so we're just delaying the inevitable. Could have done it in a summer we didn't spend much rather delaying the inevitable for a summer we may to spend a lot depending on what the next manager will want, but we lack any long term vision.
You can miss luxury players here and there it's not a problem. City missing on Sanchez and Jorginho won't affect them a little bit and they already gave Pep Mahrez for 60m as a replacement. Missing on key players you're in massive need for is the problem. When they were struggling in fullbacks position they didn't miss on players, they splashed 130m on fullbacks in one summer. Other thing is talking about this makes it feels like they vetoed Pep's choices like what we did with Mourinho which is untrue. All City reporters at this time reported that Pep had a meeting with Txiki and board and they all agreed on getting off from Sanchez deal. For Jorginho deal the player was the one who chose Chelsea. Board was willing to spend and had previous agreement. Both are completely different from what we did in summer when we said "feck it it's too expensive for value, we better put the money in our pocket".
That doesn't mean Mourinho is blameless, or it's the full board blame. The truth is it's in between them both. Mourinho has full share of problems and mistakes he created and done, but as for Ed his overall run of the football side was a total mess, and it's coming at a time the rivals are having no problem overspending even the players they're buying are well less worth their price. They adapted to the current. We're not.
Also no one is simply saying that getting Tobby would have made us title contender as some claim. We're talking about our transfer strategy in general. Do you have any doubt the next manager won't ask for Lindelof to be sold and replaced by a better CB who will end up costing +70-80m ? Is our only problem in the situation is that it's Mourinho out of everyone who asked for a CB, but it'll completely fine when the upcoming manager inevitably do it ? If that's the case why didn't we just sack Mourinho in summer and brought on another manager who we're willing to give these players ? How will you know that the next manager will have a good vision in the players he'll ask for anyway ?
The board buys for the team not for the manager. Managers don't last longer than 3-4 years while the players last more. You buy players that will benefit the current manager and the upcoming one, not vetoing a manager's choice while you very much know that we have a problem in defense and the next manager will ask for a similar transfer anyway. Not just on defense in general but any other position. Mourinho made a terrible mistake on signing Lindelof, ok, so what ? Should we wait for a new manager to clean the deadwood of the previous one just like what we did with LVG ? I find the other clubs around us cleaning their deadwood and replacing them whoever signed them from the start, being the current manager or not it doesn't matter. He flopped, he got replaced, end of story!
If we have a long term vision and a direction for the club which we get managers to follow we would have never been in that mess.