Firstly I wanna point out that you are completely right in saying there has been some gross exaggerations of certain things, so don't think I'm disagreeing with your original points. But in this post I think you are quite off the mark on a few points (by no means most just a few).
I take your point re: a large number of changes so that was an issue i.e. giving players time to bed in, but 1. I don't think it should have been as large an issue as it apparently has been, 2. We spent over the odds for PL players to remove a large amount of bed in time, 3. Excessive change was the strategy, it does not account for terrible choices of transfers for (at a conservative estimate) half our business. So if the strategy was wrong, it is still a massive mistake on the part of the manager. Take a look at newcastle, a huge overhaul over the last 2 seasons but they are playing way above where they would expect to (tbh Newcastle are a very extraordinary example so there is only so much you can take from them and apply to it us).
I do have to categorically disagree that league position didn't matter after no top 4. I know you didn't mean for you me or the fans but to the morale effect on the players, but actually I disagree with it there too. A good manager would have those players trying to finish as high as possible.
I think liverpool have been far worse than you seem to suggest (but that is a completely subjective point so I'm certainly not saying you're wrong I'm right, just my opinion).
As tired as you are of hearing Kenny spent 110, I'm absolutely sick to death of gearing people ignore everything but net spend! Yes net spend is an incredibly important figure but so is total spend. They both have their places depending on the context of the argument. You are quite right that net spend is very much the more applicable one in the case of how much further forward has the club come since x date.
But saying we added an Andy Carroll is incredibly misleading for a number of reasons, the two most important being, he cost 35 million so we have increased the value of the squad massively compared to what most other teams have done (and net spend is actually higher than 35 mill). And even more importantly, we sold Torres who was at the time probably a 25 million pound player for 50 million! Of course you could say a player is worth what someone will pay for him, but that's a cop out of the biggest proportions. Through the ridiculously overpriced sale of Torres plus roughly 40 million investment we should have been increasing the 'value' of our club by about 65 million. So net spend here is incredibly misleading.
This bit isn't aimed at you as you have never said contrary, but total spend IS the important figure when looking at how much value a manager gets for his outlay. Anyone who works in finance will tell you that (if they are worth their job anyway). So people please wise up and stop dismissing total spend as its just as important as net spend. (again not aimed at you thundyr, you've never suggested different to my knowledge).
I too don't know if Kenny might turn it all around, players might come good, and yes there is just as much risk attached to going for someone brand new who might do a worse or better job. But better the devil you know isn't always the right answer.
Whatever happens next year, Kenny has failed this year. By some lengths. He has also presided over potentially the worst year of transfer windows in the PL era in terms of value for money (time will tell that's why I said potentially). Any other manager at any other club would have gone by now. We are a special club so I don't think we should do what everyone else does, but very often we've been left behind by modern football. What's to say sentimentality isn't holding us back again.
Kenny's weaknesses have far outweighed his strengths this season, but yes their have been minute signs that maybe things could get better. But if it wasn't him, if it was hodgson, he would have gone by now.
