I guess you've gotten a lot of negative responses to your post but I think it's very balanced. His time at Utd had quite a lot of highs, and with regards to the tournaments, yes he "lacked something to capitalize", but to an extent that something was also just a bit of luck. Had we won that pen shootout in the EL final, his time would overall look just slightly different (and probably more representative of his body of work, I'd argue).
At the end, it was the right thing for him to go and probably to an extent he had his own limitations, of course, but there is definitely an argument to make that in a fully functioning structure, e.g. one that doesn't bring in Ronaldo that summer, the team maybe carries on progressing in a different way. Maybe not - it's football fiction at this point. What we do know however is that the structure at the club was terrible. And the football under Ole was at times a lot of fun.
Actually I just got one response a pair of days ago and it was positive. But I'm well aware many people don't share my views here. No problem with it, though.
I agree on the luck, not only Villarreal but Sevilla in the EL semifinal we had 20 attempts against 9. I remember the start of the second half with our attacking trio missing one after another. The cup against Chelsea during the congested calendar, when they had 2 days more to rest which was visible during the game, and DDG had a bad day. Ole should have played Romero, but there's no guarantees either.
My defense for Ole has never been about him being excellent but as you say trying to add some balance and find the positives too, because there were plenty of them and he wasn't as bad as painted by many. I don't think the club had the pillars and the structure to do much better than 2nd in the league, winning the EL and scoring those 120 something goals, so I think he did well until that point.
Maybe he could have done it in a more elegant fashion, being more dominant, but I think after he took a look above him (the club, recruitment) and below (the players) he tried to find the most realistic formula to get results, trying to get a good balance attack-defence and and trying to highlight the qualities of these players (fast, direct play) and hide their flaws, which he did for a long time.
Many thought that bringing someone with more ambitious ideas would automatically make us more exciting and dominating, but after his pragmatic approach last season ETH opened the floodgates to build his thing and he's failed miserably.
Even ETH himself backtracked at mid way ("we'll never play like Ajax", "we'll be the best transition team") and he's completely lost since then. Outside of 'his system' he doesn't seem to have a flying clue about anything.
Maybe another manager can pull it off, but the risk will be always there when trying to develop a dominating, creative style of play with the natural pressures of this club, in the current PL where any Joe has money to burn, and a very mixed squad in terms of profiles to start building from. And this counting on the new structure orchestrating everything being a good one, which is yet to be seen.
What Ole, Carrick and McKenna did was reading the room, realizing where they were and applying common sense. It wasn't pretty at times but still miles better than the garbage we're being served right now.