I think the disagreement between those that want Schneiderlin and those that don't lays not so much in how much he is rated, but that moving forward some want the team setup with Coquelin, or a player like him, in one of the two midfield spots - ie a purely defensive, disciplined holding player that is limited in his ability with the ball. Whereas others want that type of player/setup as an option in the squad; BUT don't feel it's integral to how the team should be set up moving forward. Which means we don't necessarily need a similar player to compete with Coquelin for his spot; he's an option we have if we want to play a certain way, with Arteta and Flamini able to offer something similar in a pinch.
What I prefer, and it seems at least a few others as well, is a player that is more balanced in his play. Able to play with displine and intelligence, but also able to add to the team going forward. That player is not Schneiderlin; he shares a lot of the same characteristics as Coquelin, both positive and negative. Vidal is the obvious example of the type of player I'm talking about. He, in my opinion, can beat Schneiderlin in every single defensive ability you could name; tackling, heading, intelligent covering and positioning, he's quicker, stronger, works even harder, BUT he can also pass much better, his touch under pressure is much better, he can shoot, he's a threat at set pieces and he's a generally more intelligent and dynamic footballer.
Why can't we play with two players like that anchoring the midfield? Is it necessary to play with a player that can only do half a central midfielder's job? There's a place for specialists but if you have quality central midfielders, Ramsey and Vidal, for example; the sort that cost big money, I don't know why you'd want handicap yourself by playing with a more limited player?
