Well, it was different because the players are different. But it was still bad. 12pts from the leader, 5th best defense. But it wasn't all that defensive. Maybe in the Champions League, but we did beat Liverpool (defending champs) and could have beaten Barcelona as well. Still, we played like shit.
But i stand by my point. We don't play all that great, although we do have some instances of brilliance. But they are few and far between, there's no consistency.
But the thing is that people judge Koeman from what he did at Benfica, Everton, So'ton, and Valencia, and at the same time disregard what he is doing now and what their eyes tell them at the moment.
I think in all those previous works by Koeman, none of those featured a football that was possession oriented, concerned first and foremost to attack and not sit back. On the contrary, it was rather cautious and looked to exploit on the counter.
But Koeman now is with Schreuder as his assistant, and I think it's very clear how Schreuder's input is shaping the tactical plan of this team with huge emphasis on attack, high pressing and possession.
Koeman of course contributes other things, and it's not negative IMO to have such a balance of qualities in the technical department of the team.
Not everyone can be like Pep.
Koeman+Schreuder might be >>>> just Koeman
Just like Rijkaard succeeded with Ten Cate, but without him he could not succeed even at Galatasaray. And at the same time Ten Cate failed as a first coach.
Some people are only fit for some roles.
All in all, don't judge Koeman by his past. Judge him only by the present