I get what you are saying (although I did have to google 'cutting bait'!), but I take issue with this: "I doubt he cares much about this club any more." I'm sure he does, but he is not going to risk the £4 million a year he gets by openly criticising the American owners.
I also disagree with this: "......the more shambolic it is now, the more his reputation and legend deservedly rises." for a number of reasons:
i) Sir Alex took 4/5 years to get United winning stuff - nobody would get that amount of time now. People on here have said selecting Moyes was his biggest mistake. I'm not sure about that - possibly it was not sticking with him for longer that was the problem; he could have used his power to push for that (although he would have had to admit to the owners that he hadn't left the team in a good place, when he'd retired).
ii) When Alex was manager he often had one or two main rivals (Blackburn, Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, City) but the overall strength of the league was nothing like it is now.
iii) Man United were able to blow pretty much all the other English teams out of the water in the transfer market e.g. Rio Ferdinand in 2002 for £30 million. That is £120 million in todays money, for a defender!
iv) Made numerous mistakes in the transfer market: selling players too soon (e.g. Stamm), buying disappointing players (loads I could mention) and towards the end not strengthening the midfield at all. This left a poor squad for his successor which brings me back to point (i) whomever replaced him should never have had to work under the contracted target of 'must get top-4', it was almost impossible. When I say this people always come back at me with, but he'd just won the league. That is true, but 2012-13 was an odd season. Robin Van Persie scored 26 goals and got the Premier League golden boot. His stellar performances basically dragged United to that title, despite weaknesses in other areas of the pitch.
But most importantly:
v) Sir Alex Ferguson has contributed to the shambolic events at Old Trafford, even as recently as last August: getting Ronaldo back - an issue that is still causing a big problem today.
I don't think Sir Alex's reputation is rising, on the contrary more and more people are beginning to think that whilst he stays involved in decision making at the club - as part of the new Gill/Robson/Ferguson thinktank - he risks harming his reputation, which has already taken a hit because of his involvement in the Glazer buyout. I think there is a tendency to look back at the 90s through rose-tinted spectacles, nostalgia is a powerful thing. Eric Cantona is a good example of this: King Eric... United's saviour, but what would Red Cafe have been like after Galatasaray knocked us out of the second round of the European Cup in 1994, if club forums had existed, back then!?
Perhaps to keep his 'legendary status' Sir Alex Ferguson should have cut ties his with the club in 2013 completely, but free money is difficult to turn down.
Can I finish with a question: do any other top clubs keep their ex-managers on the payroll and involved in 'consulting' roles? I can't think of one.
Solid points that are not without merit. However despite these , it cannot be denied that SAF is one of the greatest managers in any sport. He could only compete with what was infront of him. He took over this club when it was in a bad state and yes it took him 4/5 years to build the club, but he was also vocal, self-assured and had ambition. Moreover he didn’t have to deal with a group of penny-pinching parasitic owners and their stooges. You could say he was lucky, but luck favours the prepared, and it helps if you have talent. In hindsight, everything seems a bit primitive - English football wasn’t big business (relatively) - but hindsight is 20-20, he didn’t know what he didn’t know, only what was infront of him and his ambition. The all conquering success of MUFC coupled with the rise of a world-wide audience in the 90’s and into the early noughties was what made top-level English football a global brand, and that’s what brought in the money.
SAF faced significant challenges from the likes of Wenger and then after 2005, Chelsea and pre-Pep City. From 04/05 and till his retirement, despite the Glazers’ penny-pinching, SAF won 5 league titles and a UEFA CL cup. Pep and City (backed by a sovereign wealth fund with assets around $820 billion ) is now on 4 titles and no UEFA CL. Roman at Chelsea, from 05/06, despite making a billion pound loan and being the biggest spenders for years, managed 5 league titles and 2 CL.
Rose-tinted lenses are a powerful thing, but even being cognizant of it, there’s no denying SAF is a very very special man and one of the greatest managers ever. In some ways he was a pioneer in that dawn-period of then globalization of English football, and sports became more professional and specialized. Just like Micheal Jordan and the Bulls elevated the NBA around the world, SAF and Manchester United lead English Football into the next level.
Sadly, like the post-MJ Bulls, we’ve languished under our owners. And like many fans, as we continue to see our club fall further down, my view of SAF becomes more mixed. On one hand we think back to what he achieved even with the Glazers hamstringing him and his age catching up to him. Juxtaposed against the dreck we’ve endured for 9 years now, it’s almost like a Greek parable - we flew to close to the sun for too long. When I saw that Murtough had been tuned away in Turin like a sad puppy, for some reason I thought about Evra’s story about how he was recruited - “When Ferguson and David Gill came to meet me at Monaco it was worse than an interview from the CIA or FBI”. How pathetic can this club be under the Glazers, Arnold and Murtough.
Then on the other hand we see the interfering influence (refusing Jose the first time) and the old nepotism - unsubstantiated but I’m convinced he’s had a hand in people like Fletcher, McTom, Ole, Giggs getting positions they are not qualified for. Seeing him in the stands when the club are getting smashed, and yet him keeping his silence pisses me off. If he just issued a statement saying that the Glazers need to go, that would united this fractured fanbase and light a fire under the Glazers’ asses. But as you said, it’s hard to turn down that money. He’s 80 now and probably being prudent for the sake of his children and grandkids. And that’s why I say he doesn’t care for this club, atleast not enough to risk his family’s future.
Can I finish with a question: do any other top clubs keep their ex-managers on the payroll and involved in 'consulting' roles? I can't think of one.
Neither can I, and (I think) we all know why - to ensure he keeps his mouth shut and bonded to them (Glazers); I don’t think that a board member can be involved in a takeover bid. Pity that SAF can’t “bump”into Jim Ratcliffe and some other billionaires at pub and just fall into a conversation where they offer him percentage points in ownership if he agrees to be one of the frontmen of a takeover.
