No mate, you are misunderstanding my point. I have listed the reasons why United should (if run properly, and sold effectively to a prospective managerial candidate) be a unique and attractive destination. We are in agreement that the board are shite, but I don't buy your take that we were so unattractive a proposition that we basically had no chance of securing a properly top manager. As I've pointed out Mourinho was desperate for the job when Fergie retired, and he was arguably the biggest name in management at the time.
I agree with you that united
should - if run properly - be an attractive proposition. But I disagree that we were an attractive proposition after SAF retired. The incoming manager
might have succeeded, but not straightaway, and not without a couple of really terrible seasons without us making top 4. But the board didn't have the stomach to bear those working pains. As for Mourinho, he was desperate for it for all the wrong reasons - ego and narcissism. The board needed to restructure or back the incoming manager with all the power and patience that Fergie got. And neither happened.
So yes - the board suck, but they're not necessarily wrong in their strategy but it doesn't seem like they have the stomach to follow through with it. I think they're trying to continue that strategy with Ole - but its success depends on if they back Ole even when most fans want him sacked. If the board cave, then we'll be back to square one - rise and repeat.
My end point is this - either restructure the club so that we're not dependent on a manager to improve things, or when you select a manager you back him for a long period of time even with short term failures like finishing 10th in a season. The fans will want the former but I think thats an inferior way to go because it diffuses responsibility, so I defend the board on that front, but I do blame the board for constantly caving to fan pressure for firing a poorly performing manager.