It’s ironic that if ETH had just kept the exact same setup he had last season, with swapping Weghorst and Antony with Hojlund and Garnacho and slotting in Mainoo next to Casemiro in the Eriksen role, we’d probably be much better this year even while not “progressing” our style of play simply through finishing better and defending more solidly as a unit.
Perhaps that's true, but we can never be sure. There have been several cases of coaches who took the next step in their careers, did well for a season or two, only to "get figured out" in the end. One could argue the same thing happened to Solskjaer. Got the gig at a low point for the club, "steadied the ship" but, when the push came to shove (every manager becomes an open book, sooner or later), there weren't any solid foundations to whatever he was trying to implement.
This is the debate now, isn't it? I doubt you'll find people arguing that we haven't regressed from last season. The question is whether the cause of the decline can be traced down to several mitigating factors or what we're witnessing is the failure of yet another plan which won't be able to take us much further even when these factors go away.
Last season's setup wasn't without its issues. It's quite interesting that, despite constantly failing to finish our meal in the attacking third, statistically speaking, we were the PL's third-biggest overachievers behind Fulham and Arsenal. The Gunners seem to have bridged that statistical gap in their performances this season, while we have moved backwards. This is the manager's job, when we get down to brass tacks. This always takes me back to the biggest compliment i've heard about Ferguson in the 90s (from a Liverpool fan, nonetheless): "Everybody knows how United are going to play, but few are able to do something about it".
Believe it or not, ETH and Ange are the PL's biggest overachievers right now. This is how bad we look in the underlying stats.
Which brings me to the summer planning. I'm afraid it's never that simple. Take the one aspect of our game (the attack) where we did reasonably well (xG-wise). Rashford took 19.5% of our shots from open play, with 17.70xG (Understat). This season, not much has changed in terms of volume. He's taken 18.8% of our shots in open play, but with just 5.75xG. Is it a matter of form or something else? Because Martial may be a crock and Weghorst may not be PL quality, but their profiles helped Rashford get his two best seasons at the club. On the contrary, whenever you don't work to create an open route in the box for him, and you pair him with a forward that wants to be fed inside the box (Lukaku, Ronaldo, Hojlund), his numbers plummet.
It's what i call the "Ronaldo-Benzema" paradigm. If it hadn't been for Real Madrid's 21/22 crazy season, we would still have plenty of people claiming that Benzema stayed at the club for so long because he was Ronaldo's mate. He was much more than that, and he sacrificed more things in his game than one can imagine. It's one of the reasons i'm willing to be patient with Rasmus. If we're going down the "Rashford is our main man" road, we're looking for a very specific type of forward. They’re not easy to come by, so we might as well try to create one. But it won't happen without teething pains.
I also believe that necessity has forced ETH's hand with Bruno playing as a false #9 of sorts (he's basically free to roam wherever he wants), and you could argue that he shot himself in the foot there because he "wants" his starting xi performing his Plan A at all costs. He used Sancho in that role in the summer tour, but he ditched it when he got Holjlund. Then he fell out with Sancho, who could have offered a better variable (Bruno in for McT) in the midfield as a false #9 and, maybe, a smoother transition period for the Hojlund/Rashford partnership. It never hurts to have a back-up plan.
As for the midfield, both Eriksen and Fred were playing higher up the pitch last season than most like to remember. Eriksen would often drop in the 3-1 or 3-2 structure of the build-up (first phase) to help with the rotations because of his passing range, and Fred would sometimes come to the left side of the "3" to allow Shaw to push forward (so that Rashford could play closer to the half-spaces). This, we gave up. But, in terms of solidity and defensive reliance... nope. They were generally instructed to stay high up the pitch, which is reflected in Casemiro (who was great last season according to the Caf) being the most dribbled past DM in the league (or in the whereabouts).
In his defence, ETH can claim that, with Shaw, Martinez and Malacia all out, he doesn't have a left side to use in the build-up. He can also point at Dalot and argue: "Look, it took a while, but we're getting there on the other side of the pitch". But it was always a risky plan because: a) It relies on Martinez being injury-free, b) we don't know if the inverted FB role suits Shaw and c) if it all goes to hell (which it did), Rashford's role as the main goal-threat will become problematic. And you must suspect by now that he won't put the work of a traditional winger in to offer the semblance of a solution on that flank.
Mount wasn't such a bad idea. He's versatile. He can come deeper, he can receive the ball out wide, he offers good movement and creates the opportunity for variations and the interchanging of positions that could add a few intricacies to our game. But it's true that he makes us top-heavy. And this is what ETH probably meant when he said that our goal is to become "the best transition side in the world". The ball has to move quickly up the pitch because, right from the get-go, we have the overload (6 players looking to occupy the 5 channels) high on the pitch. Sadly, it has all backfired, we basically have no midfield, and we are where we are.
Anyway, i think he's a goner in the summer. His only saving grace is that there are a bunch of young (or youngish) players (Dalot, Garnacho, Hojlund, Mainoo, Forson, i also believe that Onana will be OK in the end), who are responding well to whatever instructions they get and can become the core of a new side.
