NotSoSpecialOne

CM(Su) would be a good starting point. Almost a clean slate, so plenty of flexibility with what you can do with PIs. Dropping deep would be encouraged through Comes Deep To Get Ball PPM - tactical instructions like playing out of defense could help facilitate that. Not sure if a central midfielder can learn Gets Into Opposition Area PPM but that could in theory help facilitate attacking the box. For your defensive ask, nothing role wise. Use a player with good work rate and some half decent defensive attributes puts you in good stead.

Bad defending. They don't appear to have a DM, so your AMC is going to have space to operate anyway. They're also playing with a high line, aggressive pressing and 2 CMs who push up to mark your own CMs creating extra space between the lines.

I think your setup would need tweaking to actually accommodate two Mezzalas on attack, and I wouldn't call a tactic with half the team on attack duties conservative. Glengarry's already given you some suggestions, which I agree with but I would add that using any forward role that's going to drop off into the space between the defence and the midfield. CF(Su), CF(Atk), F9(Su) for example, who can pull defenders out of position for the Mezzalas to potentially exploit. An AF(Atk) isn't really going to be working to create space for your Mezzalas to exploit in the same way.

It's an aggressive formation, which means it will be susceptible to counter attacks. There's also space to exploit between the central midfielders and defence. You can match the 4-2-3-1 man-to-man, with a 4-3-3 (4-1-2-3) or 4-1-4-1 for example. Another option, with the right sort of players to my mind anyway, is the 4-4-2 diamond (other narrow formations could apply as well). You concede the wide areas but also match their central midfielders, exploit the natural space in the 4-2-3-1 by having a 10 as well as being fairly well suited to counter attacking. I'd imagine you'd need to start a separate thread with your tactic for something more substantial though.

Can't help but feel you lack attacking penetration on the left half of the pitch. If the wingers are intended to be primarily a support and the free 8s the goalscoring threats (alongside the striker of course) then you might consider changing the Mez(Su). Doesn't have to necessarily be a Mez(Atk) like the right hand side, a CM(Atk) with Roam From Position + Moves Into Channels is a nice alternative. A CF(Atk) likes to drop and get involved in the build up, so he needs players that'll go beyond and into the box.

I mean, when you think about it, it doesn't really make sense to have a completely inexperienced 16 year old mentoring other 16 year olds. The whole mentor-mentee relationship (incl outside football) is about experienced individuals imparting their experience and knowledge onto their less experienced colleagues.

He's quite short indeed, but it may not matter as much if the balls being played into him are on the ground rather than aerial. Also worth considering opponent attributes, for example, what's the average strength for a CB in the A-League? How does Muenta's 12 strength compare to that average? etc

Good to have you back bud

More is nice but I don't know if there's an exact number you can point to, really. The average composure of the first choice back four of my most recent champions league winning side was like 12.5 - most games we played out the back.

Sorry, it was late here when I posted so I didn't go into detail about my PIs. Will do so now. Both CB-Stoppers: Stay Wider, Mark Specific Position. BPD-Co: Mark Specific Position HB-De: Take More Risks. Close Down Less. Mark Specific Position. Mez-Su: Take More Risks. Both W-Su: Mark Specific Position. In terms of the Mark Specific Position PI, I treat this as pretty fluid - what position is being marked I change before each game (as needed) to suit the opposition. The general gist though is that the Wide CBs mark the wide positions, Wingers mark the full backs. BPD marks the striker and the HB marks the AM, or the second striker if they use one. Close Down Less may seem strange on the Half-Back, as the role is naturally very aggressive at closing down opposition and thus straying from position. But I wanted to tone that done to help keep the defensive shape, as I found HB would otherwise the defense with his pressing. I also wanted the movement the half back brings in build up, in particular and I also needed a role that would allow Take More Risks to be enabled. Much like Guardiola, my first choice here has the ability to pick out these sorts of low percentage passes and give us another option from deep. The 2nd string doesn't, so when he plays I take it off. I originally considered an AP-Su in place of the Mez-Su, for the playmaking element. But I was put off by the ball magnetism, so I landed on the Mez-Su with Take More Risks, so that player can still be a pseudo playmaker. Against elite opponents, I'll switch this to a Carrilero instead. Both first choice wingers have their respective Cuts Inside traits. They'll hold width, for the most part (nothing you can do about wingers pinching in in the final third really) but the trait/role combo gives them more options. Sometimes they'll cut into the half space. Other times they'll look to beat a player on the outside. I think that covers it all. Not sure how well this all translates to another team, as my Coruna side is one of the better teams in the world, plus you have to be proactive about your marking assignments.

It's been a while, but I felt like I needed spicing up my Coruna save so a return to the 3-4-3 system is on the cards. Thus far I've landed on the following, which is in some areas more aggressive than the old Ajax attempt but in others more passive. Chiefly a rethink about how we defend. How the results are going so far Off to a solid start but two very big tests on the horizon (particularly Man City who bought my former academy product come Ballon d'or winner in the summer).

Just musing that a CM will be deeper than a AMC for the most part and as such have better positioning to rifle off a long shot. Probably going to depend on the tactical set up at the end of the day. Long shot goals aren't something I really keep track of if I'm being honest.

Isn't that only for the benefit of AI managers? Could be wrong but never noticed any difference in performance when playing someone not in their preferred side of a central pairing.

The three roles that come to mind are AMC(Su), Enganche and TREQ. I find these roles to be less aggressive and more willing to drop off (or already be deeper such as the Enganche) the back line. Don't think I'd expect an AMC to chip as much as a CM though if you're routinely playing against dug in teams.

Thought Gareth Southgate's "mid-game management" was poor and a contributing factor to the loss. Was a bit dodgy against Denmark too but Italy are the better side so its more apparent. So some stuff there for him to mull over and learn from moving forward. Taking Immobile off and moving Insighne middle was inspired by Mancini. Anyway, wanted England to win but Italy are deserved winners so congrats to them.