Is there such a thing as too much roaming?

I decided to give the roaming playmaker role a try because I like the idea by it. But in the system I decided to put it in, I've ended up with 5 players with the roam from position PI active (either already or given to them by me). Part of me feels like it's an adventurous idea that could very well work, but at the same time I feel like the system would be more successful with a more stable midfield (you know a bit more structure to it).

--------CF-a

WM-a AP-a RP-s WM-a

--------DM-d

WB-s CD-d CD-d WB-s

The CF-a has roaming by default as does the RP. I've given it WMs as well as the AP-a (I gave it to the AP-a, as well as get further forward, as he wasn't really getting forward).

So like I said. 5 players roaming. There's a part of me that loves the idea, but I find myself a tad apprehensive. Almost like they have too much freedom.

Maybe I would be better off with a DLP-s than an RP in there.

Any suggestions?

Any comment would be appreciated.

Suppose it depends who you play as and the mental attributes of those players.

If everyone was a mental genius on the pitch it would be advantageous for everyone to roam. In the lower leagues players are going to get caught out often so you have your smartest player doing in the top leagues look at Barcelona under Peppy G. Pretty much their whole team is allowed to roam. Busquet dropping between the defence as a half back, the front 3 generally allowed to move into goal threatening space where the midfielder is then given freedom to overlap.

It's hard to comment specifically as only you can see how it plays. Generally speaking, it could work especially against mid-to-lower quality teams to open them it up and generate space. However, it could result in a chaotic midfield, where they are too spaced out, or poorly linked together so cannot find each other easily.

Against very poor sides that sit deep, they might be able to counter through the middle if your roaming players are caught out of position.

Agaisnt very good sides, they may be intelligent enough to zonally mark the roaming players and exploit the space you leave.

But this is speaking generally and so you need to actually look at what is happening in your matches.

Changing one of the WMs to WM-S would help your cause I think. With an attacking duty their roaming might be too attacking minded, but I think you need to keep one on attacking so they can support your striker. Also change CF-A to CF-S. Might all come together if the mental stats are good enough.

It's hard to comment specifically as only you can see how it plays. Generally speaking, it could work especially against mid-to-lower quality teams to open them it up and generate space. However, it could result in a chaotic midfield, where they are too spaced out, or poorly linked together so cannot find each other easily.

Against very poor sides that sit deep, they might be able to counter through the middle if your roaming players are caught out of position.

Agaisnt very good sides, they may be intelligent enough to zonally mark the roaming players and exploit the space you leave.

But this is speaking generally and so you need to actually look at what is happening in your matches.

Valid points. I guess what it comes down to is whether I feel the potential benefits could outweigh the potential drawbacks from playing this way.

Changing one of the WMs to WM-S would help your cause I think. With an attacking duty their roaming might be too attacking minded, but I think you need to keep one on attacking so they can support your striker. Also change CF-A to CF-S. Might all come together if the mental stats are good enough.

I appreciate the comment and I've tried what you've suggested in the past. What I have now though works best for what I want my attackers doing.

If you can get it to be balanced then yeah sure the benefits could outweigh the drawbacks. Lets not forget that every way of playing has advantages and disadvantages

Oh I know. I'll see how it works out.