Wasn't the decision to play a back 5 at the WC prompted by Strootman's injury? I always thought the idea of using this formation was to compensate for deficiencies in central midfield. If it needs a solid midfield to function effectively then what's the point of using the formation at all?
All well and good that it allows you to play two strikers and a number 10 but that's completely pointless if the formation simultaneously causes problems in midfield AND defence.
I don't see how the back five at the world cup made up for deficiencies in central midfield? He still had to add a defensive midfielder in de Jong and needed a lot of contribution from his AM in defense to have a 3 man midfield. It was an incredible defensive formation, solely looking to score on the counter and use individual brilliance upfront.
I didn't follow the team prior to the tournament, so I can't really comment why he played it. But I never really understood the praise for his 532 at the world cup and wrote a post on here that his tactical nous at the world cup was overrated. Other than the 2nd half against Spain, a game in which that back 5 was outplayed throughout the first half and he was lucky that they were still in the game, it never really worked well. The whole reputation of that formation working well for the Dutch team stands on crazy 45minutes with freak goals. Somehow the world decided to praise him for switching goalkeepers before the penalty shoot-out instead of criticising him for a useless formation, clearly not working tactics and failing to win the game in 120minutes against the mighty Costa Rica.
Now if you go forward to United, do you really want tactics that produce draws against individually weaker teams like we saw in the Netherlands games against Mexico and Costa Rica? If you want to turn his world cup tactics into more pro-active tactics you need to change something. Either replace one of the three defenders or the midfield destroyer with an attacking player. So far it looks like van Gaal took the midfield destroyer out and it exposes the defense again and again. It looks exactly like I wrote above. Your back 5 only reacts, they don't get any time to get into shape because there's no one in midfield protecting them and it turns everyone into a headless chicken, always a step too late and always under immense pressure to do something instantly. I'm not surprised that it constantly leads to errors in defense.
If you look at van Gaal's Ajax side in '95 when he successfully played a back 3 (F. de Boer/Blind/Reiziger), they were protected by Rijkaard in a DM/libero role acting between midfield and defense and two incredible box to box players in Davids and Seedorf. Every attacking version of a back 3 had the wingbacks pushing forward a lot and therefore needed the wide centerbacks to help out defend in wide areas all the time, so of course you need an incredible strong central midfield to give protection to the defense. Van Gaal is doing the exact opposite at the moment.
If you look at the 80's where the 532 was a pretty common formation, especially in Serie A, you soon realise how important draws were and how few wins won you the league. The classic 532 time was the Platini/Maradona era, shut up shop in defense and let your superstars create something upfront, often decide games with a freekick. But back then, a win only gave 2 points and you saw Napoli winning the strongest league in the world
by scoring 41 goals in 30 games, winning only 15 games. Back then not losing was equally important as winning. It's not anymore. It's still a good idea for an international tournament of course, maximise the impact of your individuals upfront and try to scrape through by not conceding. But that's totally different to a league campaign today. Juve's 352 worked in the league because their midfield shits on every team in Italy for example, no one would come up with the idea that they play 3 centerbacks to make up for deficiencies in midfield.