Jump to content

okereke

Members+
  • Content Count

    42
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

60 "Houston, we have a problem"

About okereke

  • Rank
    Amateur

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Welcome to the (active) community! I was kinda like you back in the day, never wanting to post and just reading, but once I did it I enjoyed it a lot so I think you definitely did the best you could. Be sure you'll have tons of fun engaging in conversation with the gents around here and it will allow you also to learn much more. One thing you constantly repeat through your text explaining your approach is that you still feel that this tactic is not yours, that it is just a combination of other tactics, etc etc... Don't sell yourself so low man! How many real life managers build stuff
  2. Wait what? They said Touch would have a Beta version too... Waiting for it to drop or they to announce there won't definitely be one to be honest.
  3. Awesome! As I have it now we're pretty solid defending as you can see by the results I posted yesterday. It seems like I have found the right balance in defense with the triangle of the CBs+BWM. I guess I prefer to do innovative and creative stuff while having fun and exploring some new ways to play the game than just download a pre-made tactic and press the spacebar ad infinitum to see my inbox full of "congratulations on winning the cup again!". Personal taste. To me, the problem is not the MEZ not going forward (they do and pretty well) but rather wide, kind of overlapping t
  4. "Remember when I signed my contract a few months ago and moved to Merseyside? Remember what they said? 'He won't make it here as in Scotland. He won't be able to handle this level of play. This is no one-team league. No minnows here.' They can suck it now, that's what I say." - Robbie Gould, Liverpool's manager. PS: I did this post for fun and I know karma will hit me back in the forehead making me lose like 8 or 10 games in a row, just in case.
  5. This has to do with a few things. First, I need my IWBs as CMs covering the whole midfield because MEZ are not supposed to play that role when we are on attack (they are supposed to turn into wingers). Second, if I don't play them on attack, I've seen (or at least I think) that they hit a wall and don't go upfield enough to my liking. Third, they produce overloading situations around the opposition area through the center of the pitch and force the MEZ to get a little wider. Fourth, they sometimes even roam around the edge of the box, which is great for recycling possession. Fifth, they're oft
  6. I ditched the APs as soon as I fired the game today and played 5 minutes of the first game I didn't want more ball-magnets on the system, much less ones with "playmaker" attached to them. We're keeping the IFs there for the time being. As explained, IWBs are doing what I want them to do. They are false CMs and play like them. Get the ball, pass the ball, don't get too fancy. And they are hyper fast tracking back and positioning on defense (even while actually being players meant to play on CM positions as you can see by the names in my best XI). Man if I could make your comment abou
  7. Preseason completed. So far, so good, yet not so good. Am I happy with the results? Sure. Look at the numbers: 34 goals in 7 games and only 5 conceded (I don't even know what happened against MTK, the team was utter crap to be honest for some mysterious reason). Am I happy with the way the system is playing out? Hmm... Not 100%. At least not until the last game against Tranmere, which yes I know is not 2011 Barcelona but still. That felt like the game in which the tweaks I did to the formation made it work the closest to what I want to achieve. So this is it. I know. I know
  8. Great concepts you are using there, and indeed somewhat close to what I'd like to do, although not quite the same from what I read. After a couple of quick tests during the first match of the preseason I've already reached v5 of my tactic (yes, I save "major" changes as different versions as I get closer to what would ultimately be the final system). Right now I'm using some of your instructions, so we're close in some of the stuff you mentioned. For example, underlapping works better than overlapping more than anything because I want to limit how outside the IWBs get/remain, which that a
  9. After thinking about it, I've finally settled at a 4-1-2-2-1 formation, as the follow image depicts. These are the key points to consider, which I more or less already introduced: 2 CBs drift wide to give space to the dropping HB, creating a 3 D-Men line to build from 2 IWBs turn into play-making CMs 2 MEZ turn into Wingers (Central Wingers) 2 Wingers (probably IFs) get inside 1 DLF to link with the IWBs during the build up and share the ball with the IFs in the area As you can see from the names (not definitive, but projected), I won't be using play
  10. In name of those present here I ask for all of those docs to be photographed and uploaded and shared here. Or you can just send them over DM to me
  11. Probably not entirely relevant (as we don't discuss your system exactly as is or talk about how to change it), but you may find some light here from me and @SD.
  12. Replied in the quote, not completely focusing on how I'd go against Chelsea but rather applying my answers to this IC#2, but hope it can pour some interesting stuff into what you probably expected to read as an answer. I didn't mean or wasn't going for Fluid in the title as the "Fluid Shape" that is used in FM. I used it as defined in football as a whole, in the "real world" rather than FM. I could have use other terms such as "adaptive", "transformative", or whatever. What I meant was to represent somehow the classical "Totalvoetval" of the Dutch in that if you look at the diagra
  13. Intro Following the somewhat unexpected (and good) response to my first tactical thread here (which came from a challenge originally posted by @herne79 and was heavily inspired by @westy8chimp and @Ö-zil to the Arsenal! work), here is the second instalment of the series that I plan to keep writing about for some time, or at least in those moments time allows me to. As I already said in the first topic and Concept thread, what I'm trying to do here is only to build formations or work on concepts I've read or watched somewhere that, even not fully knowing about them, inspired something that
  14. Here are some stats and numbers. Thanks for the idea, I will keep track of them during the duration of the series. Pretty good record both on goal scored and allowed, with a 1.29 goal difference between them in all competitions. Rangers, for example, were incredibly potent in offense scoring 94 goals (2.47 per game) in 38 league matches while allowing 38. Had Morelos not been injured (in a match against us...) for 3 months he could have finished with over 30 goals easily (he scored 17 in 18 league games). To not play a true-forward and go with a strikerless system, something I had ne
×
×
  • Create New...