The only problem I have with that is the 'type' of coach.
Hoddle - experienced at the time, not a winner but a coach with a reputation for getting teams to play well (not with us though) -
Santini - A vastly experienced coach who was much more defensive minded. - a winner
Jol - A coach who wanted his team to attack and be open. - a project coach
Ramos - A coach who wanted his team to be highly tactical/technical and disciplined. - a winner
Redknapp - A coach who wanted his teams to play on the front foot and have a go. Typical 4-4-2 football. - a short term coach
AVB - A technical/tactical coach who wanted to control games. - A project coach
Poch - A highly rated upcoming coach - A project coach
Mourinho - Pragmatic coach who has won it all - winner/short term.
As you can see we bounce around from coach to coach, no specific identity of how we want it to be. And I'd argue that two of those reactive gambles were the more successful (Jol, Redknapp) other than Poch of course.
....And that's why we don't have success or continuation. Decisions are too reactive and not made with a consistent theme.
That is partly fair I would say. Summarising a coach with one sentence isn't very useful in my opinion, but I'm not going to completely disagree that there maybe should have been a bit more consistency as to the type of coach.
Santini would be the odd one out for me as he was far more defensively minded than the others. Part of the argument to get rid of Pochettino was his demanding style. Would you then hire the same kind of coach or someone more pragmatic?
You got some examples like Simeone, but most cases these days are more similar to ZZ at RM as you got 2-4/5 good seasons at a team. And not sure if you can find that these successes are because of continuity in terms of kind of coach. Is Klopp a continuation? I would say that would be a stretch.