Why is the winning aspect so much important when Poch comes in discussions while on the other hand people have no problem if Ole won nothing at United as long as he's selling deadwood and doing the "rebuild"? We aren't having a trophy hunter manager either, you know, and his supporters want him to stay because he will "rebuild", he will "sell the deadwood", he will "play youngsters", then when we say Poch will pretty much do all this to a same or even better degree and can do even more, suddenly winning trophies becomes the most important aspect, and we can't hire a manager who won nothing, but let's keep Ole, not because he will win us trophies but because of the "rebuild". What will prevent Poch from doing this "rebuild" too? And if he won nothing at United it will be fine as long as he "rebuilt" the squad, like what Ole supporters are using this as a shield to defend him with whenever bad results happen.
The difference in standards between the two here is just funny for me and honestly doesn't make any kind of sense.
What's the most important thing for you? If it's rebuilding the squad in this period then why Poch isn't suitable? If it's winning trophies now why are we keeping Ole currently?