Southampton are in relegation trouble. We are midtable in the Premier League.
Under Puel there have been no scandals. There have been no James Pearson, Dennis Wise, Stan Colleymore incidents. Leicester can travel abroad without people expecting disaster.
Apart from the 2015-16 season this has been the most successful since the days of Martin O'Neill. The performances have not been as good as the results but that was as true of O'Neill.
This is a weak argument David.
You cannot compare teams or managers from different eras like this. You also cannot compare two clubs with vastly different resources.
For example, our current team would destroy the Martin O'Neill side. Both are in similar positions in the league but football has moved on.
Since 2015, our net transfer spend is around £133m (according to transfermarkt. com). Southampton have a net spend over the same period of £11m. As an aside, for those that feel that our owners have backed us to the hilt, clubs such as Brighton and Bournemouth have a higher net spend over this period than we do.
Southampton have a much better disciplinary record than us. To be honest, everyone else has a better disciplinary record than we do under Puel. Does this mean anything whatsoever? I doubt it.
I'm not even going there on the difference between managing a side that won the Premier League two years ago versus one that has been nowhere near such an achievement.
So, there are more variables necessary than just claiming mediocrity as some sort of happy place.
The only commonality that seems relevant is that the majority of both Southampton and Leicester fans have similar experiences of Puel. Both couldn't wait to get rid. Granted, Southampton have gone from bad to worse but that is no reason to avoid the inevitable truth that we've underemployed in our managerial position since Ranieri left.