I played in a 4-3-3 most of my life. American football is not even similar to european though. you can't compare that. The year I played 4-4-2, I was able to be much more creative. As far as success goes... they were both successful.
I don't understand how you would be more creative with the 4-4-2, and actually I don't even understand what you're talking about. The 4-4-2 means the wingers are more restricted because we have less cover in midfield. Moreover, the two forwards work in tandem sometimes with the two center midfielders having to be very careful to not get caught out.
While in regard to the 4-3-3, you have more opitions up top and more exchanges, and that causes the opposition more problems while two of your midfielders could potentially jump in on the attack while one holds back. Any manager that studies the game will tell you the 4-3-3 allows for more creativity because it's not as static as the straight 4-4-2. Capello used the same 4-4-2 and we were lucky to win many games because we looked awful.
And like I've said many times, in my opinion we have players more suited for the 4-3-3 than the 4-4-2 because we don't have a Cristiano Ronaldo or Ryan Giggs patrolling the wings... players who can take on defenders and beat them on the dribble. That's very important with the 4-4-2, you know. And considering we have Tiago and Almiron, two players that are more used to the 4-3-3 than the 4-4-2, it's rather apparent what we should be working on.
And by the way, the Italian straight 4-4-2 is different from the English version.