You would have been better served reading the actual unit diaries/after-action reports of the units in the theater than "sourcing from scholars". We tend to brutally honest in our reports, so the truth is available to you.
Bottom line, we crushed them - and you would do well to make the acquaintance of a few of our diminishing supply of European theater combat vets. They were awe-inspiring. Look up "Hurtgen Forest" and "Aachen" to gain an appreciation for how damn tough our infantry really was - or just visit one of the many cemeteries in France, Belgium and Germany to seem how many we lost versus how many of them are buried there.
Writers that find some new "truth" about how lousy we were against the Nazis are a dime a dozen lately. You are wrong.
I happen to agree about the diversion of support on Market Garden, but on the other hand you could argue that had Patton, not Horrocks, been in charge of the tank units, that would have been successful as well.
And the stories of vets, while inspiring, aren't always accurate. However, "Men Against Fire," which was written by a WW II combat historian, was based extensively on those who were serving at the time, mainly so that the Army could address training problems after the war. I don't think you could call him a "Germanophile" either. I'm not wrong. Wish I was in this case.