Pre-empting a Good/Bad season!

I appreciate it's difficult to get an idea of how a tactic works before actually playing and analyzing a game, but I know there are some clever heads in here so figured before I go and tear my team apart and sign players suited for this tactic I *think* is going to work, I'd like to see if any of you can find any noticeable weaknesses beforehand.

It's based on trying to get the best out of my key players.

A couple of things to note:

- Odegaard has the PI's of a wide playmaker. I thought having a wide playmaker and an Enganche in the team would be too much.

- Origi has the PI 'Move in to Channels'

Team Instructions, Shape & Mentality

Team is 5th in the league in terms of passing & 6th in the league for first touch which is why I've adopted the TI's which I hope will maintain a possession style of play. Team is 6th in the league for work rate and 7th in the league for stamina which explains the TI 'Close down more'.

Team shape is based on having 2.5 specialized players as per wwfans sticky and mentality is control because I *feel* my team can be considered one of the strongest in the league. This would of course change dependent on the opposition.

Initial concerns are:

- Not enough supporting forward runs bar the W(A) and WB(A). Would I be getting enough from the B2B and WM (Otherwise a WP)

- Origi not strong enough for the CF(S) position. Poor passing and team work (Both 11)

- Ibe & Markovics PPM's of "Cut Inside Often" will go against what I want, i.e. them to stay out wide and offer a completely different option.

My season has literally just finished, and I didn't enjoy it because I couldn't get the team playing the way I wanted and it felt like I just skipped the whole season, so I really want to put some thought in to this, really understand it and enjoy it again. It's a while until I play, so just wanted to see if there's any obvious weaknesses.

I will keep this thread updated with how my team ends up playing.

Thanks.

EDIT: Second CD position is empty as I need a stronger CB than Mammana / Sakho.

This is a "Why don't you just play with it and find out" type of thread isn't it...

... I've adopted the TI's which I hope will maintain a possession style of play.

... Not enough supporting forward runs bar the W(A) and WB(A)...

You want possession style but want more runners when you have a W-A, WB-A, FB-S, BBM and WM-S? Runners would typically receive through balls which are more risky with a higher chance of losing possession. If you want more runners you would probably need a formation change to move a player deeper so he can make runs forward rather than dropping, which would mean your AMC unless you went strikerless.

Do you have space for more runners when playing Control? Remember Control is still quite an attacking mentality with players looking to play forward. I'm currently using Standard + Pass Into Space (with very fluid) and very similar roles to you, players will retain possession through lateral/back passes but still look for through balls to runners. It's a nice mix, the extra patience and slightly deeper play opens space for runners. My point is you don't have to play an attacking mentality just because you think your better than other teams and "better quality runs" rather than "get more runners" might be the answer.

Preseason wen't well. A few additions, as well as a few departures but no new key players. I decided against all the team instructions, bot because they 'didn't work', but because I wasn't sure they'd play out like I wanted so I removed them all. My current tactic and starting XI looks like this

My first game is up against Man Utd, who had a very strong year just gone. They've currently have Mourinho at the helm, so they're not to be messed with. I went in with the team and tactic exactly like above and it went much better than I could have imagined.

The goals came from Origi, Coutinho, an OG and Milik. I think this result was extremely kind on United as well as Origi actually missed 2 penalties! It should have been 6-0! But anyway, quick observations from these stats:

- Poor pass completion which probably contributes to the equal amount of possession.

- Poor distribution by keeper.

Now, I also played a game against Chelsea in the Community Shield which we won on penalties, the exact two issues above were also present in this game. A quick look at the intercepted passes against United tells me there might be an issue here

Anyway, let's look at the gameplay and how Coutinho (WP) / Odegaard (E) played out.

FIRST GOAL

From the screenshot above, Gomez (CD) has just intercepted an attempted through ball and played it to Jorge. Jorge plays it forward to Henderson who first time passes to Coutinho, whose taken up a nice option on the left wing.

As Coutinho receives the ball, he drops in. Grujic, with Ibe are both bursting a gut to get forward. Odegaard drops deep as the Enganche to receive the ball. The rest is history.

SECOND GOAL

We break from a United free kick deep in our half. We still have a lot of work to do as Odegaard plays it to Origi who does so, so well to get close to the United goal.

The below shows me the set up of Jorge & Coutinho on the left flank which I'm happy with. But, how does it end?

[video=youtube;wiGb0837fwU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wiGb0837fwU

It's great to see Coutinho in the mix of the action where he should be finishing goals like that off.

FOURTH GOAL

The ball gets recycled from a throw in, and Grimaldo picks it up on the left. He finds Coutinho in pockets of space (yay), who finds a dropping Odegaard who plays a magnificent through ball to Milik who dispaches beautifully.

[video=youtube;nprY4ZZW8-Q]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nprY4ZZW8-Q

So, everything went well here. Made it pretty difficult for me to assess the tactic defensively as United really didn't offer much. My next match is up again Southampton away, which I think will be a difficult test.

Based on the above, I have made a few changes to the tactic:-

- Changed keeper distribution to roll out to defender

- Changed passing from mixed to short

You want possession style but want more runners when you have a W-A, WB-A, FB-S, BBM and WM-S? Runners would typically receive through balls which are more risky with a higher chance of losing possession. If you want more runners you would probably need a formation change to move a player deeper so he can make runs forward rather than dropping, which would mean your AMC unless you went strikerless.

Do you have space for more runners when playing Control? Remember Control is still quite an attacking mentality with players looking to play forward. I'm currently using Standard + Pass Into Space (with very fluid) and very similar roles to you, players will retain possession through lateral/back passes but still look for through balls to runners. It's a nice mix, the extra patience and slightly deeper play opens space for runners. My point is you don't have to play an attacking mentality just because you think your better than other teams and "better quality runs" rather than "get more runners" might be the answer.

Makes complete sense. As you can see from the above post, I completely dropped the shouts and just went with the shape & fluidity, player roles & a couple of PI's.

Clearly I'm confused about what type of identity I want to play

Changed passing from mixed to short

Were the passes that failed long passes and were there other shorter options that would still advance the ball (attacking mentality will look to pass forward) ? Just asking as you've only showed your pass success percentage without showing analysis of passes you want to cut out. Will shorter passing cut it out? why was it picked? what other options were there that you prefer? will shorter passing encourage that option? etc

Maybe to increase your pass success you just need better players (passing, decisions, vision etc)? Changing your instructions will potentially fix an issue (pass success) but create another (penetration).

Next up.... Southampton away who set up with a 4-2-3-1.

Uh oh. Take aways:

- Plenty of shots, not enough on target, which sends me to the shots analysis screen.

Bugger. "Work Ball in to Box" shout an option?

- Pass completion improved. A sign that the short passing TI has done it's job effectively.

So how did the players fare in their positions?

- Rulli's distribution has significantly improved since his PI changes.

- Nothing else I can really spot here that looks completely out of place?

So, the loss to S'ton. What went wrong? I think they killed me on the wings, which is where their goal came from. My average positions show my team were playing pretty narrow. Even Ibe, who I really want to play as an out and out winger, but I think his PPM of "Cuts Inside from Both Wings" is hindering this. I noticed this at half time, so included the TI's "Play Wider & Exploit Middle", but this made no difference.

So let's break down their goal. It started with a throw-in from the right. The ball made it's way to edge of the area and to Cedric. Now, Coutinho actually challenges Cedric to a 50/50 but presumably misses out because of his poor strength and bravery. Cedric ends up playing the ball back to Chalobah and he bombs forward, leaving Coutinho for dead. As you can see, Jorge is far too narrow to deal with the threat of this overlap. Cedric crosses for Balotelli who gets the better of Gomez and dispatches. The players being out of position etc wasn't an issue, it's just the fact we couldn't and didn't deal with their width.

[video=youtube;p0L9bHqiJyw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0L9bHqiJyw

As I'm playing "Control", I thought this pushes my players wider at default, so I'm a little baffled as to how I conceded this goal.

Did I offer anything moving forward? A lot less than what I did at home v United.

Were the passes that failed long passes and were there other shorter options that would still advance the ball (attacking mentality will look to pass forward) ? Just asking as you've only showed your pass success percentage without showing analysis of passes you want to cut out. Will shorter passing cut it out? why was it picked? what other options were there that you prefer? will shorter passing encourage that option? etc

Maybe to increase your pass success you just need better players (passing, decisions, vision etc)? Changing your instructions will potentially fix an issue (pass success) but create another (penetration).

Another good question. I've just checked a few back, and you're right, the handful I've checked there's really not that many passions options.

I'm not sure based on these 3, whether any TI would help, except maybe retain possession. There just doesn't seem to be any passion options so the players are resorting to hoof ball. Would this tie in nicely with your suggestion of resorting back to Standard to encourage lateral / back passes?

Chelsea 2 - 0 Liverpool. It was all going so well.

In image 1 does Coutinho have any instructions or is he just a WM-S?

In image 2 I think Henderson is under pressure and maybe lacked composure in that instance so made a safe clearance rather than being an instructional problem.

In image 3 does Henderson have the ball? Was this off a goal kick or a tackle? Just wondering as the players are in there defensive positions (WB-A all the way back at DL), the higher mentality will make him look for a forward pass but I would of thought his defend duty would offset that.

I would find more instances, can't make a conclusion off them.

I'm not sure based on these 3, whether any TI would help, except maybe retain possession. There just doesn't seem to be any passion options so the players are resorting to hoof ball. Would this tie in nicely with your suggestion of resorting back to Standard to encourage lateral / back passes?

I'm not saying its the answer, it gave me what I wanted in my 4411 but I wasn't using your roles&duties, TI's, PI's, team shape or players so its not guaranteed to improve performance or give you the style of play you want.

It depends what you want, there are lots of options:

1) Lower Mentality: Lower tempo, less preference to play forward, deeper, less pressing (so will affect your defensive play)

2) Lower Tempo: More time to make a decision, allow players to get forward from there defensive position and make themselves available (attributes dependent ofc).

3) Retain Possession: Less risky play, work the ball around to feet and use movement to create higher percentage plays.

4) Use more support and less attack duties: The attack duties have a more attacking mentality so will look to play forward more on a already attacking team mentality so support duty will reduce this and should increase number of shorter passes but decrease number of runners. (More movement based style that I think fits with Retain Possession and Roam From Position)

5) Use more playmaker roles who players will look for and typically play deeper so can recycle the ball. Similar to point 4.

Remember you can't give instructions that makes your players attributes irrelevant, its who they are and what they can do.

I'd be thinking about looking at your RHS. With both a winger and BBM bombing forward, are they leaving space behind them and a massive gap for the oppo to exploit (especially if they have an AMC)?

I've noted all of your points above, especiall you, summatsupeer, thanks for your help so far.

Changes since the 2-0 loss to Chelsea at the Bridge:

- Changed WM(S) to WP(S)

- Changed B2B(S) to CM(S)

- Changed W(A) to W(S)

- Changed WB(A) to CWB(S)

- Changed FB(S) to FB(A)

- Included "Work Ball Into Box" & "Retain Possession"

So now my tactic, in full fluidity looks like this

These changes are based on me wanting to retain the ball better, and hopefully not waste my chances as soon as I get in to their half thus the "Work Ball Into Box" shout. These are my recent, up-to-date fixtures as well as the league table. So, definitely "not bad", but I crave success and I want better.

My two Enganches, Coutinho and Arango - I feel I could be getting more out of them. But 3 goals and only 2 assists for someone of Coutinho's calibre, and an average rating of 7.3 for the two of them doesn't cut it for me. Odegaard, in that WP(S) position has been doing considerably better.

I'm gonna keep chipping away at this.

I've noted all of your points above, especiall you, summatsupeer, thanks for your help so far.

...

...

No problem.

I would watch your left side, WP-S and CWB-S both have Roam From Position I think.

What do you expect the Enganche to do in this tactic? He is the most attacking minded in the team and looking to play Risky Passes... but to who? Yes the Retain Possession will reduce this a bit but all the other roles are now support and the only player more advanced could be roaming. He's looking forward whilst the rest of the team are being more conservative so probably not giving him the options that his instructions+mentality make him look for.

No problem.

I would watch your left side, WP-S and CWB-S both have Roam From Position I think.

What do you expect the Enganche to do in this tactic? He is the most attacking minded in the team and looking to play Risky Passes... but to who? Yes the Retain Possession will reduce this a bit but all the other roles are now support and the only player more advanced could be roaming. He's looking forward whilst the rest of the team are being more conservative so probably not giving him the options that his instructions+mentality make him look for.

I'm going to make the assumption that the OP wants the left back to overlap the WP - in which case (if it were me) I'd probably go for an adapting a WB with the necessary PI's than using a CWB,

I agree about the EG - can't see it's purpose in this set up. Have you tried an AM(A) and see what happens?

Great thread, and some nice posts from the OP. I'd agree that in my experience attack duties in a control setting aren't conducive to possession football, as those players are simply too aggressive, and additionally their support/defend teammates often aren't on the same page.

I've also noticed the same issue you're having with your creative midfield players in terms of their average ratings. It seems to me that in this version of FM, midfielders who won't be winning a ton of tackles only get really high ratings if they rack up goals, assists, or have an absolute ton of key passes. I personally more or less ignore the average ratings for my midfield creators, instead focusing on how the side as a whole functions offensively when they're in the game, or taking a deeper look at their stats. To be fair, I don't play them in playmaker roles, as I prefer a more universal approach, so maybe that's simply the issue. They're not seeing enough of the ball and their defensive mediocrity is keeping their ratings down. Doesnt seem like that should be a problem for you though, but it's worth investigating. Are the players you want to be your playmakers getting enough touches? And when they do, do they have the options necessary to be dangerous, or are they isolated or left only with simple lateral/back passes?