Your Rodgers observation doesn't 'rankle' me at all, I just find it a bit irrelevant. Rodgers is managing Leicester City, a club with a revenue of less than a third of ours. It's not the standard we should compare ourselves against.
As for Mourinho's second place: I fully agree that we mostly played awful football and the final points total flattered us big time. I hated Mourinho's football and quickly became sick of the man himself, too. The point, however, is that Ole inherited a top 4 squad and turned it into a... top 4 squad; it's now a younger top 4 squad with slightly better potential but it's not a huge, unquestionable achievement as you portray it to be. And there ARE some parallels with that 2017/18 seasons: we are, once again, overperforming our metrics in terms of points. Understat's expected points table has us at 26.70 points, which is far worse than the actual record of 33 points, and much closer to our standard of last season and the season before that. Only Southampton and Everton have been overperforming by a bigger margin so far. Liverpool are pretty much exactly where they should be and City (and Chelsea) underperform.
Ole's big game record isn't significantly better than that of his predecessors (or at all, really, at this point), with the exception of Moyes who was just a disaster on every level. That he beat Leipzig and PSG isn't exactly a great argument, considering he then proceeded to lose to both and exit the CL. So my slightly mischievous remark was meant to correct your assertion that somehow the other two can't even get close to him in this regard when in reality, they very much can, and there's actually very little between them at this point.
This is very much debatable, by the way: when Mourinho got sacked - which, again, was long overdue and I'm not in any way trying to claim he should have stayed; he should have been fired after the Sevilla press conference, in fact -, we were... 6th.
What I'm trying to get at is that it's not at all undeniable that we have made great progress. Ole has indeed revamped the squad quite a bit - but it remains to be seen if it yields better results than Van Gaal's gutting of the squad. So far, in my opinion, he hasn't achieved anything that we haven't seen from either of his predecessors and no matter how much you or Bilbo or sammsky try to claim that it is now definitely a steep, unstoppable upward trajectory, the fact is you base that optimistic prediction on little more than, well, optimism and faith. And you shouldn't disparage people who don't share the same optimism and faith because they have very good reasons for their own pessimistic outlook. Just as we had good reasons for pessimism when Mourinho finished second - which I never championed so stop putting words in my mouth, if you would -, even though the optimists of that era kept telling us that there were clear and actual signs of progress (I was sick of hearing how we beat every team in the league at least once, and scored the most goals in the post-Fergie era). I don't think the situation is that much different, frankly, expect that this time our manager is a much nicer guy who doesn't intentionally set out to ruin football matches for everyone involved.
Again, the most important point is that there is plenty of room for debate here and those being negative about the prospects of the team aren't being ridiculous and out of line, nor are they necessarily toxic as the OP seems to suggest.