To be honest, I don't see it as disrespectful.
With quality intelligent players, 4-4-2 becomes about a billion other tweaked formations with shouts from the touchline!
Wingers push on = 4-2-4
Striker sit in = 4-5-1
etc
I saw about 10-12 games in the season Saints got promoted and nothing they did was revolutionary!
They played 4-4-2, 11 men v 11 men, and because they had more quality in their team they won more often than not. Not because they played a particular style ie; on the deck, or route one. They were just better!!!
I guess I'm saying that you can over complicate things and I think our last manager was probably guilty of that.
But a lot of fans like to convince themselves and others the if only.
If only Thorn had played the 3-5-2,the4-4-2,the 4-3-3,the 4-1-2-1-2,the 1-2-3-2-2,the1-8-1 we would have stayed up
If only Thorn had made his substitutions earlier/later in 65th rather the 75th we wouldn't have got relegated.
If only Thorn had played a more adventurous/cautious formation we could have stayed up.
The idea we got relegated because the players weren't simply good enough is an idea without a scapegoat.
Thorn has been accused of being tactically inept,but so was Coleman,so was Boothroyd,so was Dowie,so was Strachan.
Presently it seems anybody who has ever been to a football match is being recommended by fans for the job.So whoever gets the job will be not a lot of fan's preferred choice,and one thing is a given,as soon as we have a bad run,hit tactical prowess will be called into question by some fans.