Chill.
Firstly, we do have options. They may not be great but my point was that what we're doing now clearly isn't working so may as well change and try something else.
Second, I never mentioned Juve.
Third, we ARE going out to be defensive, that's clear to everyone (well almost everyone). That's clear from how we change tactics when results going against us... Newcastle, Chelsea, Juve all showed a clear change in attacking intent from start of game to end. We won one, should have won another ....
Finally, don't just lump people in with others and assume. Read my posts, you'll see I've been reasonably positive until very, very recently on Jose. Even now, I'm not saying he's rubbish and 100% to blame (as some do, say Mick321), I also blame some players (posts are clear).
BUT I also blame Jose for tactics, not playing players in best position/formation and for persisting with Lukaku and Matic regardless of form) and 433 (regardless of results).
I've seen loads of United managers, huge changes in our success (or lack of it, including a relegation). I don't jump on managers instantly, I try and be supportive and balanced so don't dive in and assume from one post.
Do I want Jose to stay? Probably not now as don't see him changing anything. Am I on seventeen threads blaming him for everything? No.... but selecting players who are in awful form is costing us and sends a terrible message to squad players ("doesn't matter what you do, xxxxxxx is going to play").
No, they aren't great options. If the better option isn't working, then an inferior options isn't going go hold us in better stead.
Changing our formation isn't going to change our approach to the game, that should be a fairly obvious observation. If Jose wants players tracking back or to sit with a deep line, then he's going to do that whether we have 3 in midfield, 2 up top, wingers or no wingers. People put far too much weight on how a team lines up on paper. In terms of personnel, that's about as attacking as we could've resonably set up.
We are just going in cycles at this point. We've played 3 at the back, we've played wingbacks, we've played one and 2 in midfield, we've even tried 2 up top. But always the solution is to change formation if something isn't working.
The discussion is about the Juve game, that's where the quotes I another poster were debating originated from, hence the discussion around Lukaku involves Juve.
That's great, and I agree with much of it. But let me draw us but to the original point I made and you quoted. Lukaku might not be in form, but what was the alternative in that specific game, the one Jose was commenting on. You complain about a lack of attacking intent, fine, if we are to remove Lukaku from the line up, what attacking player will we replace him with? If we change formation as you and others suggest, who will we bring in to make that formation work (again, against Juve)? You take issue with players being played out of position, there's no reasonable alternative that isn't going to see players play out of position (see suggestion of playing Mata out wide).
As so often in these discussions, context is completely ignored to make a wider point. If you want to change our formation (again), fine. Is the Juve game the one to do it in? Don't we need a little time to train towards that goal? If it doesn't work, will you still be as enthusiastic about the change, or will you look to blame Jose for it (a general point)?