cmonreds

Reserve team training: 1st method: Use youth training schedules and no role training. + Players in the reserves will continue to develope broadly as generalists - Players are not specialized attributes wise/tactical familiarity for the roles of the 1st team tactic(s) 2nd method: Use youth training schedules with role training. ? Are training sessions with Match Practice needed for focusing on role training 3rd method: Use 1st team training schedules with role training. + and - the opposite of the 1st method of training the reserves. Scouting (also training focus): All positions/roles in the tactic: 1st priority: Technique, first touch and passing are always most important. 2nd priority: Mental attributes for passing (vision)/press resistance (composure) Players playing in the areas most congested by opposition players needs the best abilities for the above attributes (DLF, CM's). All positions except the Central defenders: Ability to move/position themselves in possession (off the ball, anticipation) The most offensive players (DLF, IW's, CM's) needs slightly higher ability for this compared to the DM and IWB's. If the club can buy/train players with all the neccessary attributes for pressing as well as teamwork is after sought. Defensive players (CD's, DM, IWB's) should have good defensive attributes as well. Always try to get the best Sweeper Keeper possible for the club.

Congratulations, Good feeling when titles are won. I really like how you have developed the tactic and added your ideas to it.

This thread has both FM23 and FM24 training schedules, training has changed in FM24 where some match preparation sessions has been removed. That is the reason. There is more stuff about training with training schedules in a thread named club DNA el rondo in the tactics forum.

Impressive Thanks for sharing your tactic. How did it end?

Personally I wouldn't use a poacher up front in a very fluid tactical system. The poacher to my understanding is too one dimensional and focusing on converting chances. Other striker roles as DLF, CF and possible AF are better for teamplay and both creating and finishing chances. My tactics have only utilized IW's for the longer term. If wingers are used they needs to be either exceptional 1 vs 1 (for my tactical structure) or needs support from other players (mezzala, sidebacks in defence). Both the latter and using wingers sacrifices lateral compactness compared to my current tactic.

It is true and I try to be conscious about it, to exclude randomness a very high number of test results are neccessary and this requires time I do not have. Instead the most obvious effects of randomness is excluded and effects where assumptions/theory and results are concurrent is emphasized. Regarding testing/positioning below is two examples of how it can differ and what is emphasized. Similiar 2-3 set-up and positioning as with the 433 formation can be acchieved with a 3421 Wide formation. Left image: el Rondo Dominate w/3421 formation Rigth image: el Rondo Dominate w/433 formation Left image: 3421 1st test Middle image: 3421 2nd test Right image: 433 Assumptions/theory of using a 3421 formation to replicate the positioning is that the IWB's would be positioned a little higher (due to starting positions) and the Libero acting as the DM would be positioned a little lower. This is concurrent with the results of testing and can be emphasized. As with the differences between the tests of the 3421 they can not be emphasized too much for just two tests. There are variations between the width of IW's and how far up the pitch the whole team is positioned for the two tests. These are due to randomness in the match and are not put weight on/considered. Also the right IWB (no. 5) is positioned higher than the left IWB (no. 2), this is due to another set of variables aka your opponents tactics. As with research/testing in real life, where variables also are in abundance, things needs to be simplified and research/testing concentrated around a limited number of variables.

4th season finished with the el Rondo tactic(s). One version of the tactic where the IW's were staying wider, the IWB's instructed to get forward and the DM to hold position was created. This version was tested a few times when Rennes needed a goal in the late stages of a match. It didn't produce the goals and was not used again after a few tests. Once again 2nd in the league behind PSG. Record number of goals for Rennes, also with an increase in conceded goals compared to the last two seasons. The distance to PSG in points increased this season. Shared 1st place for possession and pass completion. xG - overperforming as PSG have done for all seasons Out of possession xGA - even with conceded goals 1st trophy won - knocked out PSG in the quarter finals vs PSG in the league PSG winning the CL three times in a row Tactical theory/discussion One possible change is to change the IWB's to ordinary FB's staying narrower. The FB role can be sought to replicate the IWB role as much as possible by assigning PI's so they behave similiar to the IWB's. A sure thing effect of changing to fullback roles are increased width in the 2nd line of the RD. This might not be a bad thing for how the tactic works as long as the teams shape in overall keeps the compact shape. The use of FB's can have an effect on the DC's with Libero (defend) roles positioning. Keeping all other instructions the same except mentioned below the following changes has the following effects: Left: el Rondo w/IWB's and Libero's Right: LIbero's, fullbacks (no forward runs, cross rarely and sit narrower) The left image (el Rondo with IWB's) allows for DC's assigned the roles of Libero's. Three central players in front of them (IWB's and DM) leads to the Libero's positioning themselves as central defenders and not venturing forward. When changing to fullbacks roles the Libero's will use the space and move further up. The fullbacks leads to the IW's positioning themselves more narrow/central. The team positioned higher up the pitch can be due to randomness in the match or a result of the "new" shape. I look for how the players/roles position themselves in relation to each other at this stage of testing. The overall team shape is vertically more compact and slightly (not much) decreased lateral compactness. Also the 2-3 RD is more like a 4-1 shape. What are the effects of assigning forward runs for the fullbacks ? Compared to the used el Rondo tactic this is an increase in the number of forward runs for the tactic. Even with a support role it is a slight increase in risk. Left image: No forward runs for fullbacks (right image above) Right image: Forward runs for fullbacks When fullbacks are assigned forward runs their average positioning in possession is slightly higher compared to the Libero's. There is tendency that the Libero's position themselves slightly more conservative in relation to the DM position. The fullbacks with PI hold position is not tested as this does not replicate the IWB roles used in the tactic. What are the effects of changing the DC's role to central defenders instead of Libero's? Left image: Libero's and fullbacks forward runs Right image: CD's w/FB's forward runs Decreased vertical compactness (more like el Rondo current version) and the 2-3 RD is re-established. Using Libero's and creating the very vertical compact shape and 4-1 rest defence can increase counter pressure due to compactness. The Libero's positioned higher than central defenders can make the team much more vulnerable to balls played behind the defensive line, if the counter pressure fails. Preliminary Conclusions: Using both fullback and libero roles increases compactness and the shape of the rest defence towards a 4-1. All images: The three central midfield, no effect or change needed. The front three (all instructions staying the same), the IW's are naturally positioning themselves more narrow/central due to the fullbacks pushing them inwards.

Wow, very enjoyable reading both in content and form

What are the PI's of the CM, BWM and RPM ? I like the team fluidity Are you aiming for a 2-2ish rest defence (RD) ?

If I understand you correctly you are looking for some "fixed" combination of roles that suits possession tactics? If so I think you are approaching it from the wrong end. My opinion is that the ME and tactics creator is more flexible than just to look for certain roles and combinations that is suited for possession tactics. Like @Johnny Ace and @NineCloudNine mentions it is all about how you delegate/allocate the risk taking. Risk is neccessary, but it has both an upside (what you can gain and why you take the risk) as well as a downside where you can be punished for taking the risk. For possession tactics you should be considerate with the risk you take. It is common to play with a high press and DL, this make your team vulnerable with the available space behind your defensive line. The more risk you take the more likely that you will loose the ball and the opposition exploiting this space. Also for possession tactics pressing when out of possession is equally important. The roles/PI's you assign in your tactic should cover both these aspects. There are different ways to delegate/allocate risk taking for possession tactics. You can reduce/limit risk for 9 players and let 2 players take a lot of risk, or you can even it out and let most of your players take medium risk with PI's on mixed for dribbling/passing/crossing/shooting. Also passing length and forward runs is risk taking. How many players in total taking these risks in your tactic is what you should consider.

Had a break from FM and just started the 4th season. No transfers in due to available players strenghtening the team are too expensive for Rennes 20 million GBP transfer budget and wage structure (range 14k to 85k p/week used for current players). Received several high bids for players but they were rejected or asked for higher bids. This is mainly due to the team now being at the maximum levels for being unified/builded relationships and cohesion, and wants to keep this at current levels. With the current playing squad for the coming season there is less room for drastic development for the players in the 1st eleven (the stars will change/increase when amount of matches and age increases for the youngest players). Some players have reached the age where they might decline, Bourigeaud at the age of 32 has declined sligthly and is replaced in the 1st eleven by D. Doue and Santamaria will reach the age of 32 this season. So far played with the el Rondo tactics and have come close to winning the league the 2nd and 3rd season. PSG have employed Guardiola and are constantly improving their squad through transfers. For the club to progress/improve to compete with PSG for the league with the current players/squad improving tactics might be the only way to get an edge over them. This discussion will also review/summarize the tactical discussion from this thread. Further discussion in this post will follow as shown below: All variations/versions of the tactic has the same overall idea of high pressing, quick short passing and dominating the midfield/centre of the pitch. Classic 433 w/CWB's maintaining widht - 2-1/2-1-2 RD with CM's as controllers (The original tactic) Test match won 1-0. For this tactic the IW's are sitting narrower giving the benefit of three central attacking players (DLF being the 3rd), these three players are normally the best finishers. The CWB's are providing width and all five attacking channels (centre/half-spaces/flanks) are effectively used. The CM's instructions (only roaming) are making them act/play more like controllers in midfield. This is neccessary due to the 2-1 RD structure and in practice the RD structure being more like a 2-1-2. The positional transitions between in/out of possession is quick and doesn't demand players that are very good at positioning/movement to work well. el Rondo 433 w/IWB's - 2-3 RD with CM's more attacking (The current tactic) Test match draw 1-1. In this tactic width is in theory sacrificed with no players designated to maintain width. The IW's har neither stay wider/sit narrower as PI. The CWB's are changed to IWB's and creating the 2-3 RD. The CM's role are changed by giving the PI to get further forward and move into channels, as well as roaming to create the Mezzala light role. This shape can be described as a 2-3-2-3 shape. Compared to the classic/original version the main benefit is inreased control of the centre of the pitch and the midfield area. This leads to the tactic well suited to prevent central counter-attacks when loosing the ball. Stats wise possession increases and the team runs considerable less as well as a decrease in high intensity sprints. This is beneficial in the long-term (season) as it puts less strain on the players. Wide play is still present and the number of crosses are the same (number can be influenced by corners taken short), the main difference being that the IWB and CM together with the IW on the respective side to a larger extent shares the crossing/duty of going wide. The increase in final 3rd passes can be down to not being able to penetrate the opposition when they are staying compact. vs classic The positional transitions are more demanding and players have longer distance to move, especially the IWB's and they need to be good at positioning and movement. el Rondo 433 w/IWB's - IW's stay wider (evolution) Test match won 3-0. The only change being the IW's staying wider. This requires IW's that are able to operate more often on their own and they need to be good in 1 vs 1 situations. Stats wise compared to el Rondo (IW's not staying wider) there are fewer shots, decrease in xG and long shots. This could be down to randomness. Passes in attack are more accurate and this can be caused by stretching the opponent. Increased width leads more distances covered by the players. Decrease in final 3rd passes could be down to better penetration. Two of the three goals were due to IW's staying wider. vs el Rondo For positional transitions this version leads to the players covering the biggest distances so far. el Rondo 433 w/IWB's - IW's stay wider and changing CM's to Mezzala's (evolution) Test match won 2-0. This shape is more of a 2-3-5 shape and similiar to modern tactics. Huge increase in chance creation and xG and long shots as well (randomness can influence this). Highest possession, more progressive passes and increase in final 3rd passing. In light of the increased xG this is likely due to more penetrating final 3rd passing. The shape is less compact and the opposition countered and had one decent goal scoring chance as well. The reduced OPPDA is due to more players being positioned higher up the pitch (Mezzala's). vs CM's For positional transitions this version is more demanding of the players abilities for positioning/movement. High intensity sprints/distance covered the same. The passing map shows good interplay between the IW's, IWB's and the Mezzala's. The IWB's can be given PI to get further forward and the DM PI to hold position if more players are needed up front (attacking/dominate version). Modern 433 - 2-3 RD with Mezzala's and wingers (evolution) Test match won 2-1. The wingers have cut inside as PI. The right winger is right footed, the left winger is also right footed. This tactic has the biggest decrease in tactical familiarity for roles and this can influence the testing. Might be due to randomness, still xG increases with wingers and possession decreases. Increase in crossing with wingers. More progressive and final 3rd passes, together with the increased xG this is likely chance creation due to stretching the opposition defence and utilizing the whole width of the pitch. The higher OPPDA might be caused by less compactness up front. This version is less compact and in theory this could lead to the opposition creating more chances against own team. This is reflected in the stats, stats can be influenced in the low tactical familiarity for the Mezzala's and especially the wingers. vs IW's For positional transitions this version has the biggest distance to be covered. This version is more demanding of the players and they should have good positioning/movement abilities. Major benefit is the wingers wide play that can lead to penetration into the box from a 180 degree angle. Increased compactness effectively reduces this angle. Changing the RD structure and/or playing style (revolution) This is a possibility as well. Still the current 2-3 RD structure works well and evolution is preferred instead of revolutionary changes. Summary: Dependant of the ability of the team different versions of the tactic can be used. For good teams width should be utilized and for medium/poor teams compactness might be the best option. The emphasize of width/compactness can also differ in relation to own teams ability vs the opposition's ability, as well as venue (home/away). For Rennes in the current save game the increase of width, atleast in the attacking dominate version of the tactic might be required. At home most teams are sitting back and being very defensive. This has led to the team already loosing five points at home with the current tactic not utilizing width to break them down. The test match in this post is against Reims which was lost 0-1 in the save game (retest with same tactic for this post ended in a draw 1-1 and the only match not won). Making this tactical change/evolution/progress early might be crucial to finally win the league.

Yes, recovery is performed with the physio's/sports scientists independent of condition of the players.

Thanks We follow the same line of thought in regard to midfield overloads/numerical superiority. The starting point was to use both the 2-3 and 3-2 for the same reasons you mention. Pondered about and tested the central defenders with stay wider in the 2-3 against two striker formations as well as the narrow 3421 with two AM's. Found out that it was't neccessary to use the instruction. If the players are decent enough with and passing the ball as well as movement a 2-3 should work. Also a SK gives support if the DC's needs a passing outlet when pressured. The following are examples from matches in the save. Rennes in red avg. position in possession before subs. Opposition in white avg. position out of possession before subs. Against the 3421 (popular formation in my save) the 2-3 has numerical advantage in both the 1st and 2nd line of the rest defence. And against formations with two strikers the DC's will naturally play a little wider without being instructed to do so.

Speaking of the man, my save just got a little bit harder/more challenging

Just finished the 3rd season. First of all, PSG are invincible so far in this save also winning the FIFA Club World Cup in 2025. Rennes also lost to them in the French Cup the 2nd and 3rd season. It is a huge challenge to overcome PSG and win the Ligue 1. In the 3rd season Rennes has improved/progressed by gaining 3 more points, scoring 3 more goals and conceding 3 goal less. Still this wasn't enough: We had a good run and this is the results of the league campaign: Matches against PSG are often evenly mathced but they are difficult to win against away. Left image below away in the league PSG won 1-0, right image at home in the league which Rennes won 2-1. At home in the cup vs PSG with the 2nd best eleven lost on penalties. Often playing attacking led to more injuries with Head of Sports Science indicating that we had a 7% percent lower injuries than expected. This is the lowest acchieved with Rennes for the last three versions of FM. Probably when leading with two goals a switch to control version with positive mentality slightly reduces intensity and can decrease injuries. No fatigue during the season though. Cautious version with balanced mentality extremely selldom used in the 3rd season. Stats 3rd season Possession numbers same as 2nd season and again top ranked teams on possession in the playable leagues in the save, Rennes has the highest possession. No other team in these leagues achieved above 60%. In Ligue 1 the other top perfomers for possession increased their avg. possession. Increase in xG with above 2.0. For Ligue 1 xG stats are similiar as the previous season (2nd). Increase in final 3rd passes with 5 per game. Slight decrease for other top performers for the stat. Chances created decreased with 13 for the whole season. This pattern present for other performing teams as well, fewer chances created in Ligue 1. xGA - improved with a decrease in expected goals against at 6.8 for the whole season, other top performing teams for the stat around the same as the 2nd season. Two more final 3rd passes against per game, increased by two from previous season. The stats the same as last season for other top performers. For the team to progress/improve further the DM and the rigth IWB positions are the weakest in the squad. There is around 15 millon GBP in transfer funds that can be used to improve the squad in the short term (transfer funds likely to be increased during the 4th season). In the medium/longer term there are some real promising youngsters developing and this is a longer term solution. The short term solution is buying player(s) that can improve the team for the next season. Improvement of the DM position with the existing players Most used player in the position Santamaria has a good personality and is a highly influential player in the squad. This benefits the squad and the younger players. He will stay at the club but as a back-up/rotation player for the position. He has decent attributes for the role and is an able passer, still composure could be better as well as better quickness. Rieder is playing in the Central Midfielder role as rotation player, his abilitiy led to him demanding more playing time as a regular starter. Other CM's are preferred as being better finishers/creators. He could still develope slightly and redistribution of attributes in training could lead to him being a good defensive midfielder, In some sense this is similiar to Mac Allister in the DM role for Liverpool this year. A ballplayer in the role instead of a ballwinner. As I see it Rieder is slightly quicker/better movement, better composure/concentration/decisions/vision to play against/through opposition press. Defensively and strength wise he is weaker than Santamaria. Both are right footed and where Santamaria has a weak left foot Rieder is reasonable with the left, this is also a sligth advantage. The assistant managers summary/report, Fieder the intelligent and technical player and Santamaria as the more athletic player of these two: Summary of attributes Improvement of the rigth IWB position The first pick is Assignon being 2 stars for the role with support duty. Not excelling in attributes but having a decent average. Decent quickness, anticipation, bravery and teamwork but lacking in the required passing/ballcontroll/movement/mental stats to be a real good right IWB. Still performance is decently good and during matches he plays quite well and are not being a weakness to the team. The back-up player for the position is at the same level as Assignon, a better defensively and physical player, albeit slower, but lesser for technical and mental attributes. There are 4-5 reserve/youth team players that can be retrained from DC/DM/MC positions and be decent/good players in 2-3 years. In the short term term there is no solutions for retraining without weakening other positions. The transfer funds will be used on this position if an affordable player that improves the position is available. If no such players are available, and since Rieder becoming a defensive midfielder a young player designated to be a defensive midfielder will be retrained and played in the rigth IWB role. Retraining and focusing on improving off the ball and composure this player can excel in the role. If