good versatile player vs great single role player?

[talino7]

When give the option do you choose a player that can play multiple positions at the accomplished and natural level or one that is very good at one single position?

[FrazT]

Depends on the rest of the squad, but I would lean towards the versatile one

[Overmars]

I find due to the game mechanics around some CA being used up by player versatility that I get more value out of players who play in just one or two spots. Players who are accomplished at 5-6 spots will inevitably look like they are missing out in the attribute department when compared to their CA or star rating peers.

Of course, it's nice to have one or two Milner types in the squad to provide injury cover.

[enigmatic]

This feels like the classic "it depends" question.

If I'm picking my first choice central defender, I want an excellent DC, not a pretty useful DRLC/DM who will let the opposition strikers score more goals by being a bit slower and dopier, even if they have really good passing.

For my fourth choice central defender, on a budget and with a pretty limited or injury prone second choice DL, the DRLC/DM is going to have more appeal.

It's less clear cut the difference between a fairly well rounded winger who can do a lot of things in the final third quite well from either side of the pitch, and a player who's excellent as a one dimensional player sprinting to the byline and crossing on their one good foot but can't pass or shoot or do stuff on their weaker foot, because the well rounded player might be better as first choice against opponents that can defend against pace/crosses as well as better cover and more possible to experiment with to find different ways to create chances  (although there's likely a room for both in my squad)

A player who's perfectly adapted to a role I rarely ever use isn't much use to me, unless he can retrain (or is so good he makes me consider changing shape). But some players are so much better than others at their level that they'll perform better out of position than specialists.

[du Garbandier]

I've got a senior player just now who's a natural at WBR and AML. First choice at the latter and pretty much also at the former. Because he's switching between the two frequently, he isn't settling in either role.

(By the way, it's hard to differentiate between defensive back line WB and defensive midfield line WB -- he's the latter, and not the former.)

For me, a WB who can play both, or who can play CD is a useful and desirable versatility (Also WBR/WBL). AMR who can play AMC or AML, MC who can play DM or AMC, striker who can play AM and vice versa -- those are useful versatilities.  Positions that I don't use -- FB, ML/MR -- I don't care if the player is a natural there; in fact I avoid them, because the staff evaluation always includes suitability for those roles.

[2feet]

You find a lot of brazillians who have a wide spread of good attributes, one or two 16s, lots of 13s, 14s, 15s, but I find their play is a bit boring and generic.

But you have a very good player who has few higher scores but the ones he does have are higher, 17s, 18s, and are focussed in key attributes for the specific role and position that you need, then that is gold-dust.

Find enough of these types of specialists across different positions and your team will fly.

You dont even need a team full of them, just in the positions that are key for your formation / team instructions... probably a striker, centreback,  plus a couple of others.

 

 

 

Edited July 20, 2022 by 2feet

[podunkboy]

I have always been a "team-focused" sort of manager, in that whether a player is a first-team starter or a regular rider of the bench, he needs to be flexible enough that I can send him on in a variety of position or roles and expect him to perform competently. I think it comes from playing LLM where one unexpected injury and you may need to put a center back in at midfield because that's the best available player still left on the bench. I don't even buy one-position "superstars", I'd rather buy 2-3 competent guys who earn their paychecks every week. I know I'm in the wrong, I know that I know NOTHING about football, but that's the way I play it. 

[talhak]

I tend to have single role but effective players instead of versatile ones. Especially when it comes to key positions such as striker, advanced playmaker, and central defender.

[glengarry224]

With a more versatile backup player, you can sometimes sign a better player who demands more playing time.  For example, if he plays DC/DM, he can play 75% of matches:  three straight matches backing up DC then DC then DM, then one match off, rinse and repeat.

Also depends upon how many subs you are allowed to designate and use per match.

[phantombandit]

Single position for starting 11, versatile for subs.