What do you think of these roles ?

[energumene]

 

Hello everybody !

This is on my current save with QRM in french Division 3 (predicted 5th) :

AF - A         DLF - S

TQ - A

BWM - S MEZ - A

A - D

WB - A  CB - D CB - D FB - S

GK - D

All TIs appart, what do you think of this set up ? Does it make sense ? Is it well balanced ? 

My thoughts are : two traditionnal CBs behind a balanced midfield with a runner, a ball winner and a defensive ball-playing 6, one offensive wing back and one conservative to provide good cover, an offensive trio with a creator, a fulcrum and a more agressive runner/finisher. 

Thanks in advance !

[Experienced Defender]

My preference when it comes to narrow systems is to use wing-backs rather than fullbacks, simply because as the only wide players they need to provide proper attacking width. Or at least a fullback on attack duty, but certainly not paired with a mezzala or any attack-minded role. 

Basically, these are tweaks I personally would consider for your setup:

- swapping the strikers' sides (AF on the right and DLF on the left)

- either switching the mezzala's duty to support or changing it into a bit less attack-minded role (carrilero or BBM for example)

- changing the RB into a WB on support following the previous tweak concerning the mezzala

So if the above tweaks were made, the setup would look like this:

DLFsu    AF

TQ

BWMsu  CAR/BBM/MEZsu

A(HB?)

WBat      CB       CB          WBsu/de

Now on the left side, you still have the more defensive midfield role (BWM) providing cover for the attacking WB, but he can now better link up with the striker in the form of the DLF - who initially was on the right.

And then on the right, you have a more of a midfield runner role that can provide more direct support for the AF compared to the BWM. 

And making the RCM (a bit) less attack-minded compared to the initially setup has also allowed for a fullback role - WBsu instead of FBsu - that can now provide better attacking support without too much defensive risk. I added the defend duty as an option for the RWB, just in case you find it too defensively risky when on support (especially if coupled with mezzala).

Anyway, keep in mind that fuilbacks/wing-backs are key in any narrow system. If yours are not good enough, then better consider some more regular (i.e. non-narrow) formation. 

[energumene]

Thanks a lot for your advices, relevant as always !

I'll give those tweaks a go. They definitely make sense to me.

I have a very good left back, with a good back-up on the bench, but my right backs are kinda defensive, more conservative, no high offensive attributes for this tier (low crossing, dribbling, off the ball, but strong marking, tackling etc). So that's why I sticked to FB role on this right side, but I'm gonna try the WB Su. I'll be back to you !

Concerning the Anchorman, I wanted to provide good defensive cover in the central area, i dont want my DM to be too adventurous upfield, dont wanna be hit on the counter as I'll have the two wing backs upfront. I see your "HB ?", could it work ?

 

EDIT : won 3-0 against a top D2 team in french league cup, promising !

Edited December 16, 2020 by energumene

[Experienced Defender]

4 hours ago, energumene said:

but my right backs are kinda defensive, more conservative, no high offensive attributes for this tier (low crossing, dribbling, off the ball, but strong marking, tackling etc). So that's why I sticked to FB role on this right side, but I'm gonna try the WB Su

WB on automatic duty might be an option to consider. Basically behaves in a very similar fashion to WB on support, but is not hard-coded to get further forward and can even be told to hold position. 

 

4 hours ago, energumene said:

Concerning the Anchorman, I wanted to provide good defensive cover in the central area, i dont want my DM to be too adventurous upfield, dont wanna be hit on the counter as I'll have the two wing backs upfront. I see your "HB ?", could it work ?

HB is a good choice in attack-minded tactics when you want both fullbacks or wing-backs in attack-minded roles (which include WB and CWB on support duty, not only attack duties). But on the other hand, HB is more aggressive and adventurous than anchor, so if you don't want that - then anchor is probably a better choice. 

 

4 hours ago, energumene said:

won 3-0 against a top D2 team in french league cup, promising !

[Justified]

I don't know what it is but everytime I try and play a 41212 I actually prefer when the holder is in the MC strata, making a 4312. I feel it has something to do with stacking central players on top of each other. I actually tried it with Auxerre in FM20 as they lacked any wingers of note.

I think it was something like:

SK; WBsu, CD, BPD, WBat; MEZat, DLP, CARsu; AMCat; TMsu, PFatt

Granted it was based around the squad I had where I actually had a very capable BPD, a big targetman type up front and a good pacy WB on the left. We did play a little direct-ish.

It was centered around alternative build ups depending on which way down field we went. If we went down the left, the BPD could either ping down the left flank to the advanced WBL or go infield where the CAR could help support the WB upfield. If we went straight down the middle the DLP would have a MEZ attacking down the right, the WB running down the left, the TM coming deep to which if he got the ball he would have loads of on rushing players. Loads of options. If we went down the right the WBR would look to get the ball down to the attacking MEZ or even ping it forward to the TM at times.

A few observations I made was that you definitely need a defensive strategy. I mean, you always should anyways but with that formation I definitely needed something less risk orientated as well when I was an underdog. The outer MC's definitely benefit from having wider "roles" although some positions you can just add that individually.

[energumene]

Thanks for sharing your experience @Justified, very interesting, especially when it comes to wingerless tactics !

After 10 games in french D3 I'm leading the board with 24 goals scored and...... 0 goals conceded ! 

Very pleased with what I have here. Especially because I dont use much TIs, juste some basics stuffslike lower D-Line, more pressing, shorter passing, counter, play out of defence... But not an arm-long list of instructions as I wanted the set-up to be almost 100% effective by itself (even if this seems pretty much difficult I know haha). 

So it seems a solid set-up on which I can rely and start developing my small club with my own philosophy.  

Thanks again @Experienced Defender ! I'll definitely come back to you for my future experiments !  

EDIT : the clean-sheet run ends after 16 games with a 3-2 away win !

Edited December 17, 2020 by energumene