What if Jose Mourinho had succeeded Alex Ferguson in 2013?

There is a lot of myth and rumour swirling around that period, when Sir Alex Ferguson

retired, which is perhaps how the Portuguese prefers it. He was seen as a nearly man, the rejected, overlooked for David Moyes.

The truth is that the United hierarchy did actually make an approach for Mourinho in that earth-shattering period. That was despite Sir Bobby Charlton being completely against the idea, and Ferguson not exactly warm to it. The approach never created tension, though, because Mourinho had already struck a deal to return to Chelsea. Numerous sources say he was dejected when he found out he’d missed a chance to take over at Old Trafford.

The real question in all this, however, is whether it might have led to much more happiness at United had they managed to get Mourinho in 2013 rather than 2016. The latter was an act of desperation because Manchester City got Pep Guardiola. It was also a marriage of convenience that was always awkward, accentuated because Mourinho was coming out of a disastrous season at Chelsea which illustrated the start of decline.

This was not the case in 2013. There is admittedly an argument that Mourinho was never right for United. His tactics and personality always seemed to fit defiant upstarts rather than the grandest clubs in the game.

It is that personality, however, that could have solved the first big problem United faced after Ferguson. He could have filled a vacuum. Mourinho might never have been right for the club but 2013 might well have been the one moment where it made sense.

That was because Ferguson so psychologically dominated United – not to mention English football – that the club needed someone outsized to weather this and change the discussion. They needed someone who ensured they weren’t constantly missing Ferguson. Moyes obviously wasn’t that. He often looked intimidated by the job, and one infamous story has him desperately asking, “Where’s the answers?” when preparing for a press conference.

Mourinho never needed the answers, since he already had them. He also had the personality to more than weather all this. The Portuguese could have dominated discussion. This, arguably more than anything else, was what United specifically needed after the departure of a figure as titanic as Ferguson.

It could have gone beyond mere narrative or personality, though. It might have worked out in terms of pure football, too, if at least for a time.

For all the subsequent dismissals of the team that Ferguson left, it was hardly in bad shape. They were the champions. Only two players, Ryan Giggs and Rio Ferdinand, were over the age of 32 that season. Most of the squad, including Robin van Persie and Wayne Rooney, were in the kind of prime age that Mourinho prioritises.

The profile of the team actually looks a lot like his Internazionale. A 32-year-old Nemanja Vidic could easily have been the kind of centre-half “warrior” that Mourinho absolutely adored. The entire squad were battle-hardened, and capable of mixing it.

Mourinho would have brought in better signings than Marouane Fellaini, especially since he went and signed top target Cesc Fabregas for Chelsea a year later. That would have helped fire a focus that could have prevented the sense of drift at the club. It is far from inconceivable that Mourinho could have immediately ensured United went and won the title again. That’s especially the case in a season where the main challengers were Brendan Rodgers’s porous Liverpool and a Manuel Pellegrini-led Manchester City that were not at the level of Guardiola’s.

Mourinho himself was far closer to the peak of the game. Any title success would have immediately diverted United from a course of consistently appointing the wrong manager – including in 2016.

As is often the case with these kinds of alternative histories, however, it’s hard not to examine the wider factors and still think the outcome would have ended the same.

Even by appointing Mourinho in 2013, United would probably have just delayed a reckoning. There were infrastructural problems at the club that went beyond any manager. This isn’t to say no one could have succeeded, but rather United still would have required a complete overhaul to restore the club to the level it should be. Another title or two wouldn’t have solved that. The same issues would have almost certainly manifested at some point.

That might have been from a more toxic situation, too. While Mourinho in 2013 had endured nowhere near the struggles of 2015-16 at Chelsea, his final season at Real Madrid was a dismal campaign. It also highlighted many of the difficulties that would define the second half of his career. The players were fed up with his abrasive approach and reactive tactics. There were already signs the modern game’s evolution was leaving him behind. That is why he is in Turkey now.

Chelsea 2015-16 might simply have come at Manchester United 2014-15. His actual time at Old Trafford saw him scathingly criticise some of the players who were there in 2013-14. Few at United remember his tenure fondly, even though it brought their highest points return since Ferguson as well as two trophies, the League Cup and Europa League in 2016-17. Many still roll their eyes at the mention of him, shuddering at the memory of Mourinho’s domineering approach. His personality could still have ended up having a corrosive effect, after initially convincing.

Now, history is repeating itself at Fenerbahce. The Turkish team are dropping more points than expected, with much more defensive football. There are reports of a dressing room afflicted by “unhappiness and hopelessness”, with expectations of seven-man defences.

That’s all the worse since the club earned 99 points with attacking football last season, only missing out on the title to rivals Galatasaray by three points.

There is still a vintage Mourinho charm there, of course. People still hang off his words, if not his football, especially at the start. It is what always allows him leeway. One point worth making about a 2013 arrival at United is that it might have allowed others leeway.

Someone other than Ferguson could have won the Premier League, changing this historic narrative that the club always has to have a long-term patriarch. There would at least have been less pressure on Erik ten Hag and not the same burden from just having the job.