Mentally vs Attacking Football

[Keyzer Soze]

Hi, 

I've came up with this tactic and my initial idea was playing with a Positive Mentality. 

Playing with a top team, at least in domestic games, so I thought that I could afford the extra risk and go with a Positive Mentality. 

Tactic is very simple, with very few Ti's. 

In terms of pressing, I'm using a split block with the 3 advanced players + the CM(a) with instructions to press more. I also added the PI to take more risks to the right winger and the PI to roam from position to the CM(a). 

Thing is... My team don't play well with a Positive Mentality... But wins every game with a Balanced Mentality. And when I say win... Is really winning with 16 wins and only 2 draws in the last 18 games. 

We create more chances, play better football. 

Now, why this happens? Whats the key factor that change so much the tactic going from positive Mentality to a balanced one? Is it tempo? Passing directness? 

And this brings me to my other question... When I need to go more attacking, because I'm chancing a result, what should I do? There's no point increasing the Mentality... so what should I do? 

[NotSoSpecialOne]

Compare Positive without Be More Expressive (if you previously used BME with positive) to your Balanced with Be More Expressive?

Default tempo on positive is higher than it is on Balanced so that's something to consider as well.

[Keyzer Soze]

Yes, I also used BME with the positive Mentality but, at least to my knowledge, BME don't change others instructions (team or players), just adds more creativity and I think a little bit more roam from position in the final third. Am I wrong? 

Edited May 7, 2021 by Keyzer Soze

[NotSoSpecialOne]

No. My point there was more that the additional creativity and roaming may be overkill for your side on Positive mentality. Especially when you also consider the other point that default tempo is higher on Positive vs Balanced and something your players may (or may not) have struggled with.

[herne79]

1 hour ago, Keyzer Soze said:

Playing with a top team, at least in domestic games

This might be a clue.  You'll be facing a lot of packed defences.  Using higher mentalities isn't always the answer to cracking those tough nuts so stopping it down a notch can help - you start to play a little deeper, with a little less urgency, drawing opponents out and creating better chances.

Being more aggressive can also work of course but I suspect the above is what is happening here.

[Keyzer Soze]

38 minutes ago, NotSoSpecialOne said:

No. My point there was more that the additional creativity and roaming may be overkill for your side on Positive mentality. Especially when you also consider the other point that default tempo is higher on Positive vs Balanced and something your players may (or may not) have struggled with.

Understood 

[Keyzer Soze]

36 minutes ago, herne79 said:

This might be a clue.  You'll be facing a lot of packed defences.  Using higher mentalities isn't always the answer to cracking those tough nuts so stopping it down a notch can help - you start to play a little deeper, with a little less urgency, drawing opponents out and creating better chances.

Being more aggressive can also work of course but I suspect the above is what is happening here.

OK, I get that 

But what about those games were playing with the balanced mentality will not work? 

What should I do, to be more attacking, to change something in the game, but without changing the mentality? 

[bibird.]

53 minutes ago, Keyzer Soze said:

OK, I get that 

But what about those games were playing with the balanced mentality will not work? 

What should I do, to be more attacking, to change something in the game, but without changing the mentality? 

A trick I often employ is to look for where gaps are in the opposition defensive shape. I'll stick a playmaker role in that spot and let him drag the opposition out. He can do it through passing or dribbling, whichever works based on how the opposition are defending.

It's an idea I pinched from this thread, so props to @Tez21:

I don't switch formation every game based on the opposition - like is used in the thread - but the idea works nicely, especially if you're unsure about a mentality shift.

[herne79]

4 hours ago, Keyzer Soze said:

But what about those games were playing with the balanced mentality will not work? 

What should I do, to be more attacking, to change something in the game, but without changing the mentality? 

- Adjust player roles.

- Alter the given duty of player roles.

- Change formation (a bit drastic but just covering all bases).

- Substitute on attack minded players (eg., sub on a winger who has the "get forward often" trait).

- Substitute on more creative player(s) such as a player with better technical skills and traits.

- Change various TIs to help drag opponents around such as attacking width.

- Increase tempo / passing directness / through balls.

- Some / all of the above.

There's probably other things, that's just off the top of my head.

So for example from your system posted above you could perhaps try:

- Changing the DLP(s) to an AP(s).  Would still be your main playmaker but from a more advanced position and looking for those little through balls onto runners (such as your CMa) rather than pinging longer passes into a pack defence.

- Giving one of your wide players an attack duty to help encourage more penetrating runs or even onto through balls provided by an AP(s) if you switch.

- I'm not overly familiar with Benfica but you should have plenty of high quality players off the bench.

- A little more controversially as I know some people enjoy it, however I really dislike the HB role, never use it and would quite happily remove it from the game.  Personal preference perhaps but I just don't see the point.  I know what it's supposed to do, I know what it does, but I've never got one to work how I'd like and have always found a much better balance for the team with other roles.  If I want someone covering behind my midfield I'll use the DM or BWM role.

[Keyzer Soze]

Thks alot for the suggestions @herne79

Gonna test some of your suggestions.

[nully29]

59 minutes ago, herne79 said:

- Adjust player roles.

- Alter the given duty of player roles.

- Change formation (a bit drastic but just covering all bases).

- Substitute on attack minded players (eg., sub on a winger who has the "get forward often" trait).

- Substitute on more creative player(s) such as a player with better technical skills and traits.

- Change various TIs to help drag opponents around such as attacking width.

- Increase tempo / passing directness / through balls.

- Some / all of the above.

There's probably other things, that's just off the top of my head.

So for example from your system posted above you could perhaps try:

- Changing the DLP(s) to an AP(s).  Would still be your main playmaker but from a more advanced position and looking for those little through balls onto runners (such as your CMa) rather than pinging longer passes into a pack defence.

- Giving one of your wide players an attack duty to help encourage more penetrating runs or even onto through balls provided by an AP(s) if you switch.

- I'm not overly familiar with Benfica but you should have plenty of high quality players off the bench.

- A little more controversially as I know some people enjoy it, however I really dislike the HB role, never use it and would quite happily remove it from the game.  Personal preference perhaps but I just don't see the point.  I know what it's supposed to do, I know what it does, but I've never got one to work how I'd like and have always found a much better balance for the team with other roles.  If I want someone covering behind my midfield I'll use the DM or BWM role.

HB is handy when you need to isolate opponents' lone striker