Maybe we would, maybe not. It doesn't always work.
With big clubs it's all about instant success, they'd happily change manager every season if it kept a winning cycle going. Chelsea have had 5 managers in 6 years and won 1 PL and 1 FA Cup.
We are heading down that same path of chop and change, 3 in 3 seasons. Obviously you look at results and the way we play and it's easy to say get rid of Pirlo, but the next guy has no guarantee of success. 4 in 4 years and failure again, then what? That's why people look at Allegri, because he's the last reference point of success for the club, they don't have any answers that provide a better solution. Guardiola, Klopp, other dreams? We shouldn't have appointed Pirlo. We shouldn't have appointed Sarri. We shouldn't have parted ways with Allegri. You can look from every angle, but generally if you change coach all the time you don't win an awful lot. You might have a deep cup run, which is what the CL is. You might win a title and then bomb the second season and start again. But then I suppose many here would be happy to finish top 4 and win the CL. You can bomb half a season and still make it look like a success, because this is the prestigious competition and a desperate obsession for us.
Why do Madrid do so well? They "know how to win it"? I think it's obvious how to win it - you win the games. They are obliged to win it, but they do not have the pressure to like we do, and players feel that. If they don't win it one or two years so what, they try again next time. If we don't win it year 1 it's a crisis, year 2 it's a crisis, year 3 it's a crisis, and so on. All we can do is put the best team possible on the field with our finances, and it would take a lot of convincing to make me feel like that is what has happened over the last few years.