Is that really true though?
What exactly do we offer a manager other than a nice wage? We have a track record now of sacking at the first sign of trouble. We have a squad that is full of players that are made up of up to 7/8/9 managers in 6 years. We can't offer a huge transfer budget because of all of this and we can't sell to raise money because the players aren't valuable to us.
Simply put we have no stability at the club. We have just proven that we won't even back a manager after spending / selling players on their instruction. I mean whos players were Patterson and the ukranian? Brands (sacked) , benitez (sacked) ancelotti (gone). Would it have not made sense to not spend the money if there was a chance we were sacking benitez a week later?
Never mind the fact we signed benitez 3 players and none of them are in the team only 2 months later. Whether they come good or not in the future, that's over 20 million spent replacing our most creative player sitting on the bench if they are lucky.
Because getting sacked form Everton doesn't seem to damage a managers reputation.
Martinez -> Belgium
Koeman-> Netherlands + Barca
Ancelotti-> Real Madrid
Silva-> Fulham
Carragher was right, we are terribly run, but there's still an appetite out there for managers to want to be that guy who finally turns it all around. We're still a massive club, with a big fanbase and with spending power.
We're not the most appealing club in the league by any stretch but we still hold some power of attraction.