Much the same feeling even if I want to win every game.
My take on former (successful) players is that I always think they've less to prove to themselves. Their first goal, their international careers, the famous managers they've played for, the adulation they've already received, the huge stadiums they've played at....all eclipse what they might achieve with their new team. The hunger isn't quite there. Whereas a player in an average career for comparison might feel there's more to do. There is an additional drive. I don't think (could be wrong) that Wilshere has much to prove. It might just be something you do after your career ends. Only so many media jobs going too.
A manager has to have something about him, a depth of character. After all, he is father figure for many players. The best managers (Ferguson, Mourinho, Clough, Wenger or whoever else you decide on your list) always have a combination of depth and determination/ drive. Farke had it - the bloke had a lot to prove. Maybe Thorup did but it wasn't obvious.
Interesting, as posters have said, who gets picked for the next two games and if they show up.
As for making a decision as big as it is for us based on two matches, before even considering the possible field??? ....then Knapper would need his head examining. Surely he would never install someone on that kind of basis? I would seriously question such a decision and the jury is still out for me about him anyway. Of course, any decision is bound to reflect on him as Thorup does. But he ought to be allowed a relative failure. Two in a row would be unconscionable.
