Of course not, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that is the only way to play, to win a football game and to be successful, I just responded to one poster calling out the other one for not watching football recently, when in fact the latest trends are changing in the favour of inverted full backs.
It's a little bit silly to "not take into account what City do" when talking about recent trends in football - unfortunately for us, they just have won f*cking treble.
It's not a template that works for every team, we can also find examples of some kind of asymmetric shapes, f.e. when Brighton played Caicedo as inverted right full back while Estupinan provided width on the left side.
To some extent even we played, and could play again in the future, something familiar on a few occasions with Antony staying wide and Dalot tucking in, while on the other side Shaw provided width and Rashford was attacking half-space with his diagonal runs.
When we are already in the Frimpong thread and talking about roles and shapes, for me it will only make sense to play him with Bruno or some pure wide forward such as MG on the right side as Frimpong is a player who loves to take advantage of his speed in wide areas.
Ps. I disagree that both White and Zinchenko played as normal full backs last season, sorry.