Personally, if it was me, I'd have sold Rooney when Chelsea came knocking last summer. He is the one player who did not fit. Kagawa was a better 10 and RVP was a better striker. That way, we would not have had this clusterfeck of an issue, and we would have had funds to actually balance the squad.
A 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1, with fluid interchange a la our 2006-8 teams, would have been ideal. Welbeck would have had the perfect opportunity to play centrally either as the 1, or as part of the 3 in behind.
It's not so much a case of keeping Welbeck and playing to his strengths, but keeping Welbeck and having a tactical setup which benefited the team as a whole. We now have the players to have a 4-3-3 at the very least, and in such a set up, Welbeck would have been fine.
Also, the age profile of the strikers we now have means that we will be having a huge outlay in the medium to short term, replacing 3 strikers when if Welbeck had stayed, we'd have only been replacing one. All three are seemingly very similar also. Welbeck was the only one who was different and had a rounded enough game to play the role differently.
On Wilson, I can only judge on what I've seen, and what I've seen so far, is a player with a very rounded game for a Striker, but in essence, that is what he is: a Striker. Welbeck at the age of 15 was running the show at RW for our U18s in the FAYC. He was starring as a no.10 in our reserves and supplying Macheda, then went to Sunderland and played off the LW in a front three with Gyan and Bent. Comes back to Utd and was very promising as a striker in a partnership with Rooney, indeed, along with Saha, the only two partnerships where both Rooney and his strike partner thrived.
Can Wilson say he has played such a varied amount of roles? At most, he can say he had a decent stint at LW for the U18s, but once he moved to CF, that was it.