Tactical Philosphies

[jc577]

I'm just wondering what people's tactical philosophies (style of play) are and how they implement them on fm/ how they adapt if they manage a side that isn't capable of playing in their preferred style?

[angelossoul]

18 minutes ago, jc577 said:

I'm just wondering what people's tactical philosophies (style of play) are and how they implement them on fm/ how they adapt if they manage a side that isn't capable of playing in their preferred style?

Personally, I like to recreate real football tactics to my teams. My all time favourites are Diego Simeone's Atletico tactic(so counter attack style of play) and Guardiola's Barcelona tactic(so possession style of play). When I take a side and for example want to play a high pressing possession style football first I make a tactic with only a few of my principles and adapting to my squads strengths. As I bring players who fit my style of play I start to change my tactic to my preffered style of play. For example if I have a technical team but slow and want to play like Barca, I make a tactic which will keen on retaining possession(work ball into box, retain possession etc) but not pressing much or high enough and as I start to bring people I will increase the d line, pressing etc

[VinceLombardi]

1 hour ago, jc577 said:

I'm just wondering what people's tactical philosophies (style of play) are and how they implement them on fm/ how they adapt if they manage a side that isn't capable of playing in their preferred style?

I'm an American who has never seen a full club game  and originally stumbled on Football Manager looking for a similar game for American Football. My entire soccer experience was a short stint playing an MMO named Trophy Manager and watching the US National Teams. When I picked up FM 16 on steam sale, I didn't know what a holding midfielder was.

So my entire approach to the game has been adapting American Football concepts into soccer tactics. 

I have a playbook, which originally started with like 12-16 different formations. I have since reduced to 5 formations and 3 different TI setups, for a total of 15 different tactical options. From there I try to select the formation that offers the best matchups and overloads to exploit the weaknesses in opposing formation. Then I use the TI tactic which best counters what the opposing team is trying to do. If it's not going well, I will not hesitate to use subs to switch into a different look 15-20 mins into the game. It's definately very adaptive.

Defensively, I have a "bend but don't break" philosophy and look to force the opposing team to work to advance the ball against me. I try not to give up easy or big plays, but am happy to let them have the ball in non threatening locations for the most part. But that said, I am always looking to pressure the passer and try to force a bad pass in hopes of an interception.

Offensively, I try to take advantage of what the other team is giving me and not force anything. If it isn't there, check down into something else. I try to use roles and my formation to create overloads and stretch a defense in the same way you use route combinations in American Football. 

It's worked pretty good so far, but it's definately been a learning experience. Interestingly enough, I discovered that I really love the sport. In the last year or so, I have become a regular spectator at my local semi-pro club and plan to purchase season tickets next year. Moreover, I am finishing up my qualification this month and will be officiating highschool soccer this fall. 

 

[cocoadavid]

12 hours ago, jc577 said:

I'm just wondering what people's tactical philosophies (style of play) are and how they implement them on fm/ how they adapt if they manage a side that isn't capable of playing in their preferred style?

I adapt my style to the strengths of my squad (I always disable the first transfer window), but I always tend to use the club's youth system.

In my 1860 München save the initial squad was full of playes with high work rate, teamwork, determination, stamina and good physical abilites. But technically  - apart from 1 or 2 players  - they were really poor. Therefore the philosophy for my 1860 München side was 'power football'. High tempo, direct football, hassling the opponent, and a great emphasis on set pieces. The focus of the general training was on fitness and defending, so the players attributes were adapting better to the style of the play. I signed players with high scores in the afromentioned abilities and determined/resolute personalities.

In my current Bordeaux save my squad had technically gifted, creative players, but physically they were not on top. Therefore I developed a possession based, short passing philosophy. The general training's focus is on ball control and attacking, the youth team's training focuses on tactics. I sign players with generally good first touch, passing, composure, vision and decision, so they are better at retaining possession. I created a "French Barcelona". Usually half of my first 11 are home grown.

I've had great success with each team, but the power football philosphy would not work well with my current squad, and vica versa. My Bordeaux have an avarage possession of 60%, my 1860 München had it only about 42-43%, but both worked.

I've got no standard formations, it depends on many factors. If I stick to a philosphy with a team, in terms of tactic, it mainly means the passing range and the tempo.

[herne79]

12 hours ago, VinceLombardi said:

I'm an American who has never seen a full club game  and originally stumbled on Football Manager looking for a similar game for American Football. My entire soccer experience was a short stint playing an MMO named Trophy Manager and watching the US National Teams. When I picked up FM 16 on steam sale, I didn't know what a holding midfielder was.

So my entire approach to the game has been adapting American Football concepts into soccer tactics. 

I have a playbook, which originally started with like 12-16 different formations. I have since reduced to 5 formations and 3 different TI setups, for a total of 15 different tactical options. From there I try to select the formation that offers the best matchups and overloads to exploit the weaknesses in opposing formation. Then I use the TI tactic which best counters what the opposing team is trying to do. If it's not going well, I will not hesitate to use subs to switch into a different look 15-20 mins into the game. It's definately very adaptive.

Defensively, I have a "bend but don't break" philosophy and look to force the opposing team to work to advance the ball against me. I try not to give up easy or big plays, but am happy to let them have the ball in non threatening locations for the most part. But that said, I am always looking to pressure the passer and try to force a bad pass in hopes of an interception.

Offensively, I try to take advantage of what the other team is giving me and not force anything. If it isn't there, check down into something else. I try to use roles and my formation to create overloads and stretch a defense in the same way you use route combinations in American Football. 

It's worked pretty good so far, but it's definately been a learning experience. Interestingly enough, I discovered that I really love the sport. In the last year or so, I have become a regular spectator at my local semi-pro club and plan to purchase season tickets next year. Moreover, I am finishing up my qualification this month and will be officiating highschool soccer this fall. 

 

I like this, it's a different perspective.  Good job and good luck with the qualifications.

[westy8chimp]

34 minutes ago, herne79 said:

I like this, it's a different perspective.  Good job and good luck with the qualifications.

@Vince Lombardi I echo that... nice approach putting the 'special plays' aspect on football (soccer). Good luck.

[moolochicken]

On ‎27‎.‎06‎.‎2017 at 05:57, jc577 said:

I'm just wondering what people's tactical philosophies (style of play) are and how they implement them on fm/ how they adapt if they manage a side that isn't capable of playing in their preferred style?

 

In football, the word tempo is used to generally summarize the attacking time difference. I am always puzzled which leads me to developing a tactic.

 

Looking at basketball, NBA teams would apply tactics of increasing or decreasing team attacking possessions counts. Teams could lower their offensive rounds when they want to limit the oppositions attacking intent are short on stamina, such as the 07/08 Celtics; while teams could also increase the offensive round counts and speed up the attacking process to be within, let’s say, 7 seconds, to maximize their attacking intent. The key that I identify, except tempo, is time for each attack.

 

I have never heard of such phrase as counting the time for each attack in football ( at least for me), with the closest being the “getting the ball back after losing at in X seconds” concept. I figured that this might be because there is a time limit for each attack in basketball, but I think this could be still of some use in football.

 

My thought process is simple: In a simplified world of football, the faster my attack finishes, the more attack I will have in a match that is fixed to 90 minutes. Of course there are a lot of assumptions: opponents would not change tactics, minimum attack quality does not matter, etc. But I considered this worth trying and started to pull something together.

 

To make every single attack to be as fast as possible, I set it on Overload, highest tempo, more direct passing with a specific shape to maintain defense to a certain extent. After stabilizing the tactic, I ended up with a tactic that will always put my team in top 4 with Crystal Palace, Bournemouth, Stoke City and won EPL with Leicester. This is far from my best tactic as I have got a few being more successful, but this remains the tactic I like the most. I guess that is the joy when one carried out something that he or she believes in.

 

For team choice, I just picked the teams that could play my tactic, because I have a tactic that I firmly believe in. It could have been the other way round for you; getting the team first then developing the best tactic specifically. I guess it’s a choice of loving tactics more or loving the team more.

[Cuenca Guy]

On 6/26/2017 at 18:34, VinceLombardi said:

I'm an American who has never seen a full club game  and originally stumbled on Football Manager looking for a similar game for American Football. My entire soccer experience was a short stint playing an MMO named Trophy Manager and watching the US National Teams. When I picked up FM 16 on steam sale, I didn't know what a holding midfielder was.

So my entire approach to the game has been adapting American Football concepts into soccer tactics. 

I have a playbook, which originally started with like 12-16 different formations. I have since reduced to 5 formations and 3 different TI setups, for a total of 15 different tactical options. From there I try to select the formation that offers the best matchups and overloads to exploit the weaknesses in opposing formation. Then I use the TI tactic which best counters what the opposing team is trying to do. If it's not going well, I will not hesitate to use subs to switch into a different look 15-20 mins into the game. It's definately very adaptive.

Defensively, I have a "bend but don't break" philosophy and look to force the opposing team to work to advance the ball against me. I try not to give up easy or big plays, but am happy to let them have the ball in non threatening locations for the most part. But that said, I am always looking to pressure the passer and try to force a bad pass in hopes of an interception.

Offensively, I try to take advantage of what the other team is giving me and not force anything. If it isn't there, check down into something else. I try to use roles and my formation to create overloads and stretch a defense in the same way you use route combinations in American Football. 

It's worked pretty good so far, but it's definately been a learning experience. Interestingly enough, I discovered that I really love the sport. In the last year or so, I have become a regular spectator at my local semi-pro club and plan to purchase season tickets next year. Moreover, I am finishing up my qualification this month and will be officiating highschool soccer this fall. 

I like this. Your ideas are more and more rare in the NFL these days as teams like to throw it all over the field. It actually sounds like the balanced offense, Cover 3 defense that Pete Carroll runs with the Seahawks. While I'm quite familiar with football, I've never looked at it tactically until I started playing FM. It's less adaptive than American football because of the substitution limits, but it gives me another way of looking at things tactically.

[VinceLombardi]

49 minutes ago, Cuenca Guy said:

I like this. Your ideas are more and more rare in the NFL these days as teams like to throw it all over the field. It actually sounds like the balanced offense, Cover 3 defense that Pete Carroll runs with the Seahawks. While I'm quite familiar with football, I've never looked at it tactically until I started playing FM. It's less adaptive than American football because of the substitution limits, but it gives me another way of looking at things tactically.

Yeah a lot of Cover 2 and 3 concepts. In terms of defensive philosophy, it prolly best matches Carroll too. I like that physicality. Either that or the mid/late 2000 Ravens with that great linebacking core. Ray Lewis really knew how to control space and react to the ball.

The specific tactics of the NFL, as in specific play or play designs don't translate well on the micro level, particularly on attack. As my understanding of soccer tactics improves, I rely less on my NFL background in that regard. 

That said, I actually find that the NFL background has really helped me in terms of overall team philosophy because there are a lot of similar concepts on the macro level, particularly on defense. 

[Cuenca Guy]

2 hours ago, VinceLombardi said:

Yeah a lot of Cover 2 and 3 concepts. In terms of defensive philosophy, it prolly best matches Carroll too. I like that physicality. Either that or the mid/late 2000 Ravens with that great linebacking core. Ray Lewis really knew how to control space and react to the ball.

The specific tactics of the NFL, as in specific play or play designs don't translate well on the micro level, particularly on attack. As my understanding of soccer tactics improves, I rely less on my NFL background in that regard. 

That said, I actually find that the NFL background has really helped me in terms of overall team philosophy because there are a lot of similar concepts on the macro level, particularly on defense. 

Well, Carroll learned under Monte Kiffin, the author of the Tampa 2. Carroll's Cover 3 just adapts that, but carries the same ideas of bend but don't break. It's rather Mourinho-esque in that it's depending on the other team to make more mistakes than you do. In spite of the physicality on both sides of the ball, they also look for the big play when they can. Earl Thomas is a very different player, but he's the equivalent of Lewis in controlling space and reacting to the ball. If you haven't already gathered, I'm a Seahawk fan.

I agree that the specific tactics don't carry over, but understanding American football and/or basketball can provide some better understanding of football tactics. Both deal with exploiting matchups and space while basketball also has a bit of the positional fluidity and triangular passing (not necessarily the Triangle Offense) that football requires.

I can't find the exact quote, but on the physical mentality of the Seahawks, their GM John Schneider said something along the lines of wanting a team that could win a street fight, and if you want to put a ball in there, we're okay with that, too.