Thing is, Emery is a very good coach and great when he can play that underdog who still has lots of quality. It’s why Villa is perfect for him, but we were never the right fit. Regardless, he did a decent enough job following Wenger and I’m happy to see him do well.

Agreed. Though just to add further context, we have spent a hell of a lot under Arteta. Regardless, the fact that Arteta can be in this ballpark is fantastic.

Your latter point is key here. Obviously it is fun when we get a new signing but I hear far too much about needing to sign Player X or Y if we are to improve our attack. We have a very young team who are continuing to learn. Not saying we won’t sign someone, but I expect to see a lot of our attacking issues resolve themselves just because we have a lot of players nowhere near their peaks.

Thing is, this is actually a bit of a positive. We all know the injuries we have had. We are also integrating a new midfield. In many way’s I’d expect this to be our rough period. In previous years, we’d be struggling. Yet we are still top or thereabouts and defensively a rock. I’m optimistic about the second half of the season.

I don’t think you can blame a manager playing negative when they first take over. Look at Arteta’s first season with us. However, you saw that as soon as Arteta was changing things he had a vision in mind. Now, there were definitely times when it was legitimate to question if we were sane to keep following that vision, but Arteta was clearly going for something his players at that point were unwilling to do. I kind of expected something similar from ETH this season, but it doesn’t even seem like they’re transitioning into an ‘ETH team’ at all. It’s like he has completely bottled it which is where I’m quite surprised. Think it also puts into perspective how good Arteta is. Takes balls to stick to his philosophy the way he has.

I’m really confused by the whole ETH situation. I really rated him (at one point I wanted him over Arteta, oh fool that I am!) and expected him to do a good job at Utd. Though it seems like he is regressing to Ole ball more and more with each passing game. Can’t say he hasn’t been backed.

I think it has some good points but I’d be wary of taking his result from the regression without question. Linearity may be the way to go but I’d be cautious of it not capturing the issue with stat padding in certain games and not capturing the idea that defences will lead to fewer dropped points (particularly against rivals). Indeed, more I think about it, the more I think linearity may be a poor model. I also feel like using City (who is something of an outlier across the whole PL) may lead to some issues, and the initial opening paragraphs are overly simplistic. Point is, algorithms will always give you an output, doesn’t mean the algorithm is suitable. I’m not disputing the result (I generally don’t put too much stock in any ‘truism’), and think it raises valid points, but wouldn’t say it is a clear slam dunk. I think it may also be worth exploring the points taken to win the league and seeing how that effects things, i.e. if points taken < threshold then better defence is preferable, above then better attack, that kind of thing.

I mean, is anyone seriously doubting the quality it took to score that? I attempted it in my dreams last night and woke up on the floor with a bruised head

While I don’t mind Trossard playing as the 9 if the gameplan demanded it, I think you’re being naive if you think the ‘Please god, not Eddie’ takes are going anywhere. They’ll shift to, ‘Well, I never said he isn’t decent. He just isn’t good enough if we want a title. We need Toney [insert whatever the next flavour of the moment is]’ and then when Eddie (or just the team in general) have an average game they’ll be back out in force.