Forged In Steel - The Sheffield United Project

[mkkadi]

Any feed back related to my tactic @Cleon

[Cleon]

9 minutes ago, mkkadi said:

Any feed back related to my tactic @Cleon

Not much to say really as you've already identified the issues. Now it's a case of trying to correct them which you seem to already know what to try etc. I'd focus on the 3 central players and read back what you've written in terms of how you say you want to play. Then ask yourself do those 3 roles actually do that? And what does this mean for the 2 wingbacks?

 

[BamBamBam]

1 hour ago, Cleon said:

Why is that an issue? People use TI's without actually knowing what they do. 

Very good. I've not had the time to write an update yet though.

Its not an issue. Just asking as i had loads!

[Cleon]

3 minutes ago, BamBamBam said:

Its not an issue. Just asking as i had loads!

And I bet you couldn't tell me the impact they had or how they change the roles you use and the way you play 

[Kingstontom88]

Great read as ever, @Cleon

I'm playing the same formation in my current save - only change is I have a DLP in the central CM slot with the more advanced CMs either side of him - do you think there is any downside to this? I see yours is the to the left of the 3 - I know it depends on roles assigned to other players around you as to whether it works or not, but does perhaps having a playmaker to the left perhaps draw oppo further away from the middle of the pitch, vacating space for a Mezalla or BBM for example...or am I reading too much into this...

[Cleon]

5 minutes ago, Kingstontom88 said:

Great read as ever, @Cleon

I'm playing the same formation in my current save - only change is I have a DLP in the central CM slot with the more advanced CMs either side of him - do you think there is any downside to this? I see yours is the to the left of the 3 - I know it depends on roles assigned to other players around you as to whether it works or not, but does perhaps having a playmaker to the left perhaps draw oppo further away from the middle of the pitch, vacating space for a Mezalla or BBM for example...or am I reading too much into this...

Mine is this way because it's how we play in real life. I have wrote about a variation similar to yours though if you want more ideas;

https://teaandbusquets.com/3-5-2-chronicles

 

[mkkadi]

1 hour ago, Cleon said:

Not much to say really as you've already identified the issues. Now it's a case of trying to correct them which you seem to already know what to try etc. I'd focus on the 3 central players and read back what you've written in terms of how you say you want to play. Then ask yourself do those 3 roles actually do that? And what does this mean for the 2 wingbacks? 

As I said the opponents sit deep and they are crowded on the centre. So, late runners from deep is very important as well as wing backs pushing opponents out of their solid positioning. That’s why I choose SVa. The reason why I choose DLPs is that when I have the possession near opponent's penalty box area he will be a supporting pass option. So the only change that I can do with the 3 central players is I can change the position or the role of MCs . Moving him to AMC spot will only overcrowd that area I think? So maybe A role change to MCa or APa will work? 

If I look at my wingbacks, WBs can also work and they can maintain possession better but they are not agressive as CWBa like you said. I thought that I need to push hard with wing backs. Am I close to solution? 

Finally, you were underdog when you begin your career. But now you are better than the others so maybe you need to make some minor changes to the tactic? 

[Cleon]

Quote

As I said the opponents sit deep and they are crowded on the centre. So, late runners from deep is very important as well as wing backs pushing opponents out of their solid positioning. That’s why I choose SVa. The reason why I choose DLPs is that when I have the possession near opponent's penalty box area he will be a supporting pass option.

The DLP wouldn't be that high up the pitch really for most cases, he plays much deeper. If you want him supporting attacking deep int he final third then you'd be better with a regista or something of that mould.

Quote

If I look at my wingbacks, WBs can also work and they can maintain possession better but they are not agressive as CWBa like you said. I thought that I need to push hard with wing backs. Am I close to solution? 

But you want to focus play in the central areas from what you've said so far. So what is the point or the WB's or more importantly what are they supposed to be doing if you direct play through the middle with the playmaker and SV? 

Quote

Finally, you were underdog when you begin your career. But now you are better than the others so maybe you need to make some minor changes to the tactic? 

I play the exact same way as in the original post, I've not changed anything apart from personnel. I just have players who plays roles differently like the David Brooks example in post 4.

[mkkadi]

24 minutes ago, Cleon said:

The DLP wouldn't be that high up the pitch really for most cases, he plays much deeper. If you want him supporting attacking deep int he final third then you'd be better with a regista or something of that mould.

But you want to focus play in the central areas from what you've said so far. So what is the point or the WB's or more importantly what are they supposed to be doing if you direct play through the middle with the playmaker and SV? 

I play the exact same way as in the original post, I've not changed anything apart from personnel. I just have players who plays roles differently like the David Brooks example in post 4.

I think I misslead you regarding my intention. I dont want to be one dimensional. So the wingbacks are important for the width. 

The outside of the penalty area is generally over crowded. The opponents four defenders and 2 DM/MCs occupying this space. As a result my two forwards dont have space to run into. That’s why I choose SV role. And the wingbacks will stretch the opposition to create space in the middle. 

[Cleon]

6 minutes ago, mkkadi said:

I think I misslead you regarding my intention. I dont want to be one dimensional. So the wingbacks are important for the width. 

The outside of the penalty area is generally over crowded. The opponents four defenders and 2 DM/MCs occupying this space. As a result my two forwards dont have space to run into. That’s why I choose SV role. And the wingbacks will stretch the opposition to create space in the middle. 

My point was more that two of your midfield attracts the ball centrally and uses the ball in central areas. Your SV and DLP are more focused on the central areas. The DLP also attracts the ball more than the other roles naturally. You're instructing them to play in central areas, where it's already crowded. The SV will take play away from the wingbacks because its a very aggressive central role that focuses on them being relentless with attacks through the centre. Also the CM is going to attack the same areas too. 

Yet you've already said these areas are crowded, which means you need to use the wingbacks more as that's where the space is. But the roles you use for the midfield 3 doesn't allow it...............

[BamBamBam]

1 hour ago, Cleon said:

And I bet you couldn't tell me the impact they had or how they change the roles you use and the way you play 

I couldn't as the 3d match engine is like watching an old Football Manager game, circa 1990, not real life football.

How people manage to work out how it effects the tactic baffles me.

[mkkadi]

11 minutes ago, Cleon said:

My point was more that two of your midfield attracts the ball centrally and uses the ball in central areas. Your SV and DLP are more focused on the central areas. The DLP also attracts the ball more than the other roles naturally. You're instructing them to play in central areas, where it's already crowded. The SV will take play away from the wingbacks because its a very aggressive central role that focuses on them being relentless with attacks through the centre. Also the CM is going to attack the same areas too. 

Yet you've already said these areas are crowded, which means you need to use the wingbacks more as that's where the space is. But the roles you use for the midfield 3 doesn't allow it...............

I see your point. Thanks. I will look into it. One last question though. Your shape looks like more agressive than mine and you use one playmaker and two MCs. You don’t have an agressive role like SV to force the centre but do your three MCs force your team to play though the middle and do they overcrowd the area with your forwards. 

[Cleon]

4 minutes ago, mkkadi said:

I see your point. Thanks. I will look into it. One last question though. Your shape looks like more agressive than mine and you use one playmaker and two MCs. You don’t have an agressive role like SV to force the centre but do your three MCs force your team to play though the middle and do they overcrowd the area with your forwards. 

My play is about 70% wing play 30% central. My CM attack is the late runner centrally and my CM support is the late, late, late runner from deep.

[forlegaizen]

3 hours ago, Cleon said:

My play is about 70% wing play 30% central.

This is interesting, I imagine its because you want to play that way?
I ask this because when i develep my 3-5-2 and its variations, I try to focus play in central areas and use the wings as an outlet when play is too congested down the middle ( for example to break down defensive teams).

Would you say the formation its more suited to wing play or its down to playstyle?

[Diego Imposta]

On 22/11/2017 at 10:56, Cleon said:

I'm surprised the Brooks piece in post 4 didn't generate more discussion especially on how to use current roles and give them a twist based on the attributes of the player, playing there.

 

I've just caught up on this thread and wanted to add: there is so much fun to be had in spotting how the way someone plays would look great in another position.

To give an example, I've got a precocious young winger who can play both flanks (dark green circles) and ever so slightly up top (yellow circle). He wants to play every game. However, he's not better than my starting wingers or strikers. There's excitement when he plays - he's quick and creative but always let me down with his dribbling or crossing. I took over a team fighting relegation so he wasn't going to get many chances to (un)impress.

But when I tried him in the hole in a few pre-season friendlies... wow. His height and headers meant the position had a new lease of life with flick-ons, when the ball landed at his feet he could pass to either striker with one touch, and the speed upgrade meant my attacking midfielder position suddenly got on the end of byline crosses. All of these highlights were new compared to my usual type.

For balance, I've experienced the opposite with a few other players too but until you experiment you'll never know 

[saihtam]

Love your talks here Cleon and hope u will continue.

Have quick question about playing players out of position. We all know Leighton Baines and how brilliant mentality and skills he has. But not getting any younger he is losing physical stats and I see his trouble starting as left back. Thinking about to use him in DM position, but he has never played there. For Brooks he is young and has some experience in striker position. Would it be to drastic change for 34 old guy playing unknown position or his intelligent makes it up?

[Cleon]

13 minutes ago, saihtam said:

Love your talks here Cleon and hope u will continue.

Have quick question about playing players out of position. We all know Leighton Baines and how brilliant mentality and skills he has. But not getting any younger he is losing physical stats and I see his trouble starting as left back. Thinking about to use him in DM position, but he has never played there. For Brooks he is young and has some experience in striker position. Would it be to drastic change for 34 old guy playing unknown position or his intelligent makes it up?

No you an play him anywhere you wish really.

[craiigman]

I was reading the ABC thread and was thinking, wish he would show some of the stuff he was working on, then I found this after haha

Really makes me want to start the Bolton save I've been wanting to do for a while.

[Meraklija Vujevic]

Nice article It will help alot of people.

 

I play 3 4 1 2 formation where I won Premiership and La liga with Deportivo and Bournemouth in first season.

My favorite role is Shadow striker so my mid and strikers are set up around him.

Also my mid is asimetric and yes I use poacher with dlp up front.

 

Tactics with 3 players at back are much better .

[matsnor21]

Im curious about which match training are you using in the season Cleon? defensive positioning, attacking movement etc

[Cleon]

1 hour ago, matsnor21 said:

Im curious about which match training are you using in the season Cleon? defensive positioning, attacking movement etc

Attacking movement once tactics are fluid.

[Khazard]

Won championship in first season played a mix of this exact formation and 2-3-2-3 WB DM Narrow only bought a new GK and some youngsters..sold ched and Leon..they are to bad in FM lol

[phnompenhandy]

On 16/12/2017 at 03:34, Cleon said:

Attacking movement once tactics are fluid.

Interesting. Why not 'Balanced', Cleon?

 

 

 

 

[Cleon]

33 minutes ago, phnompenhandy said:

Interesting. Why not 'Balanced', Cleon?

 

 

 

 

Match training there is no balanced option 

[phnompenhandy]

1 hour ago, Cleon said:

Match training there is no balanced option 

Oh right, got you.

If you always have the slider for match prep on 100%, all the way to the left, how much does it detract from long-term development?

[kmcmillan19]

On 11/26/2017 at 05:59, Cleon said:

The centre one is normally the more physical one. The outer ones, I like ones who can play with the ball at their feet.

@Cleon Do you ever find it more useful to re-train defensive minded FBs to play the outer CBs in this back 3? When I play my back 3, I prefer a more pacey back but it can be tough to find them with a good amount of pace and passing.

Do you find that it matters what their preferred foot is for the outer CBs at all?

[yonko]

On December 17, 2017 at 01:02, phnompenhandy said:

Oh right, got you.

If you always have the slider for match prep on 100%, all the way to the left, how much does it detract from long-term development?

All the way to the left is 50% Match Prep.

[phnompenhandy]

5 hours ago, yonko said:

All the way to the left is 50% Match Prep.

Yeh, 50% match prep so 50% left for general training. So presumably if you didn't use any match prep at all, the general training would accelerate by 100%, right?

This short-term/long-term issue is quite profound. For example, last season afer I won promotion I was struggling and had full match prep all season in order to grind out the extra crucial point here and there. This season I'm expected to walk to promotion, so I can ease up on the match prep and focus on long-term development of my young squad.

[yonko]

12 hours ago, phnompenhandy said:

Yeh, 50% match prep so 50% left for general training. So presumably if you didn't use any match prep at all, the general training would accelerate by 100%, right?

This short-term/long-term issue is quite profound. For example, last season afer I won promotion I was struggling and had full match prep all season in order to grind out the extra crucial point here and there. This season I'm expected to walk to promotion, so I can ease up on the match prep and focus on long-term development of my young squad.

You shouldn't need full match prep to grind out results. You need a more solid tactic, it seems.

[Luizinho]

Hi Cleon,

I’ve re-read your defensive arts thread, however though I tought I’d ask in your FM18 thread to avoid confusion. Could really use your intellect with my latest problem.

I’m looking to implement a disciplined system, that focus on sitting deep and standing off defensively. Then focuses on efficient, non possession oriented football offensively. (I understand that this isn’t the focus of your defensive arts thread).

I would like to use a very structured/structured team shape as it means I can make the team generally disciplined, while affording a few key players creative freedom. (I’d like to have a team with a core of cleaver, disciplined, physical players supplemented with a couple of free-roaming, no responsibility players). I originally thought of using a 4-1-4-1 as I think it’s a good shape defensively with little space to exploited and suits a sit deep/stand off approach.

However the issued I’ve found is winning the ball and offering some threat offensively. The main issue being, (which you covered in your defensive arts), the lone striker. He is very isolated in this approach. The combination of formation, approach (sitting-deep) and being very structured/structured. I understand why it’s happening but I’m struggling to see how to solve it.

For context I’m using West Brom as they think the squad suits what I’m looking to do, to some degree. My approach puts a lot of pressure/reliance on my ST to hold up the ball and bring the rest of the team into play. Solomon Rondon is a good player, but perhaps not that good.

Counter/Structured

GK (D)

FB (S)  DC (D)  DC (D)  WB (A)

DM (D)

Winger (A)  BWM (S)  B2B (S)  WP (A)

DLF (S)

Shouts - Pass Into Space

*understand that I only have one specialist role...

 

 

So really my questions are:

1) How to get my striker to link-up with the team, but also offer some kind of attacking threat. (Give the CDs something to think about... At the moment I’m very toothless offensively.

2) Am I at a loss to some extent with the approach/team shape/formation cocktail?

[Fosse]

19 hours ago, Luizinho said:

Shouts - Pass Into Space

I understand you's want to try and get in behind opponents but do you really want all of your players trying more risky passes? If a counter is on players' mentalities are maxed out momentarily anyway so using that instruction might be forcing play too often whereas you might need slower build up in non-counter attacking situations.

Additionally there are only minor differences in creative freedom between Highly structured, structured and flexible - the affect on compactness is greater so Rondon might end up isolated, I'd try using flexible.

[Luizinho]

1 hour ago, Fosse said:

I understand you's want to try and get in behind opponents but do you really want all of your players trying more risky passes? If a counter is on players' mentalities are maxed out momentarily anyway so using that instruction might be forcing play too often whereas you might need slower build up in non-counter attacking situations.

Additionally there are only minor differences in creative freedom between Highly structured, structured and flexible - the affect on compactness is greater so Rondon might end up isolated, I'd try using flexible.

I see the point your looking to make regarding the shout. Is it a shout best used when breaking down stubourn teams, making your teams try more 50/50 passes? If so, then perhaps it’s not what I’m looking for as a team instruction, but more as player instruction for the few players I want doing the ‘creating’.

Again I see your point regarding team shape, which I did touch on as well. I’ve always regarded the depth created by using a very structured shape would be beneficial, in regards to potential counter-attacks? However I feel the formation is slightly counter productive in that regard, as it only leaves one player up as a initial counter threat.

Are there any defensive benefits from using a very structured shape? As mentioned I want a really disciplined team, that’s to hard to break down defensively. I’ve always associated that with very structured, but perhaps wrongly.

[Fosse]

20 hours ago, Luizinho said:

I see the point your looking to make regarding the shout. Is it a shout best used when breaking down stubourn teams, making your teams try more 50/50 passes? If so, then perhaps it’s not what I’m looking for as a team instruction, but more as player instruction for the few players I want doing the ‘creating’.

Again I see your point regarding team shape, which I did touch on as well. I’ve always regarded the depth created by using a very structured shape would be beneficial, in regards to potential counter-attacks? However I feel the formation is slightly counter productive in that regard, as it only leaves one player up as a initial counter threat.

Are there any defensive benefits from using a very structured shape? As mentioned I want a really disciplined team, that’s to hard to break down defensively. I’ve always associated that with very structured, but perhaps wrongly.

Absolutely, pass into space is a bit of a misnomer as it encourages more risky passes across the board rather than more through balls. Counter attacking is difficult because a side playing deep has large distances to cover to reach the opposition's goal - it certainly appears to make sense to have increased depth to provide more of a threat but however a single player will have difficulty executing a counter themselves. An attack duty forward with significant pace might be able to get one-on-one occasionally but personally that seems less effective than a deep lying forward like London winning the first ball, laying it off to the onrushing midfielders and attacking that way.

Broadly speaking using a structured shape decreases mentality for defenders and increases it for attackers, it might make a defence more difficult to breach but equally considering your set up is already quite conservative you might find that you end up conceding too much space because your defenders are already stand off-ish. Mentality is the foremost way to create a certain style from a team, so a more cautious mentality is primarily what will enable you to create a disciplined team difficult to break down rather than shape. Rashidi for example is a proponent of playing on Defensive/Very Fluid to maximise compactness and have the whole team playing very cautiously which has its merits but also brings other issues to look out for.

For now, I'd recommend trying on Counter/flexible as it'll be deep and disciplined but Rondon should be closer to his teammates and vice versa so there's more support for counters and non counter situations.

[craiigman]

@Cleon Did you get promoted in your first season? Really found the Championship difficult first season with Bolton.

[xabiorbaiz]

On 1/13/2018 at 16:45, craiigman said:

@Cleon Did you get promoted in your first season? Really found the Championship difficult first season with Bolton.

Pretty sure he would have trounced the league. UTB

[kingjericho]

On ‎11‎-‎12‎-‎2017 at 10:49, saihtam said:

Love your talks here Cleon and hope u will continue.

Have quick question about playing players out of position. We all know Leighton Baines and how brilliant mentality and skills he has. But not getting any younger he is losing physical stats and I see his trouble starting as left back. Thinking about to use him in DM position, but he has never played there. For Brooks he is young and has some experience in striker position. Would it be to drastic change for 34 old guy playing unknown position or his intelligent makes it up?

Even though he will be marked with a red dot in the tactics pitch, playing someone completely out of position impacts most the Decisions attribute. So Baines can still be of use as a DM, even if at first he will have some positioning issues but it's the Decisions attribute which takes the biggest toll.

[Cleon]

UPDATED POST 5 WITH NEW CONTENT

[callamity]

pleased to see you say again that you dont change what has been successful just because your in a different league, or your rep is at a different point compared to the competition now, this is how i play and see people comment on how much they have to change dependant on success.  great post, grats on isak, tried to get him a few times but never been able. 

[Cleon]

14 hours ago, callamity said:

pleased to see you say again that you dont change what has been successful just because your in a different league, or your rep is at a different point compared to the competition now, this is how i play and see people comment on how much they have to change dependant on success.  great post, grats on isak, tried to get him a few times but never been able. 

I never understand why people think promotion = massive changes. Just improving the playing squad should be enough more often than not.

[Brian]

Can't wait to see how your scouting system is set up. I'm very basic at scouting and I only scout the U19 league's to spend on the possible next superstars, because the club is nowhere near a powerhouse club.

Bought a South African defender for 500k at 18 years old and 15+ determination, when he joined the next transfer window he was already worth 1.5m with 5* potential. Even if he won't make it all the way into the first team, I will make profit on him. 

[kingjericho]

I may have to implement a system like this due to my new team not having any decent wingers to suit my standard 4-4-2.

I often think of the CWB role as too demanding, and only fitting for very good players, due to the instructions it has. If I choose to play a more classic WB what major differences should I expect to see?

[herne79]

23 minutes ago, kingjericho said:

I often think of the CWB role as too demanding, and only fitting for very good players, due to the instructions it has. If I choose to play a more classic WB what major differences should I expect to see?

There are no "major" differences between a WB and a CWB (or a FB for that matter).  Differences are more subtle - start by reading the role descriptions and then looking at the default PIs and the player mentality bar found in the PI screen.  It can also be an interesting exercise to try to apply some real world examples to FM roles.  Obviously this is where differences of opinion can arise but at the very least it makes you start thinking about how players may fit roles.

[Cleon]

34 minutes ago, kingjericho said:

I may have to implement a system like this due to my new team not having any decent wingers to suit my standard 4-4-2.

I often think of the CWB role as too demanding, and only fitting for very good players, due to the instructions it has. If I choose to play a more classic WB what major differences should I expect to see?

This was the second time I've wrote about the 352. I did another piece before this one, that focused on a different kind of 352. Might bw worth you having a read if you've not already, to show the various types and how flexible you can be in terms of how you set up.

https://teaandbusquets.com/3-5-2-chronicles

As for the WB questions its very subtle the differences you'll see, the CWB is more capable of roaming from his original position, especially in the final third. He has the  license to stray more. But at the same time he also offers more width naturally than the standard WB who sits slightly more narrower. He's more focused on play in the final third compared to the WB which has a more natural split between defensive and attacking responsibility. But they both do very simliar things.

 

[kingjericho]

1 hour ago, herne79 said:

There are no "major" differences between a WB and a CWB (or a FB for that matter).  Differences are more subtle - start by reading the role descriptions and then looking at the default PIs and the player mentality bar found in the PI screen.  It can also be an interesting exercise to try to apply some real world examples to FM roles.  Obviously this is where differences of opinion can arise but at the very least it makes you start thinking about how players may fit roles.

I always think of Marcelo/Dani Alves as the prototypes for the CWB role, hence using more limited players makes me think twice. I'd like to get some wingers to play there, they seem a perfect fit as long as their defensive ability isn't completely useless.

1 hour ago, Cleon said:

As for the WB questions its very subtle the differences you'll see, the CWB is more capable of roaming from his original position, especially in the final third. He has the  license to stray more. But at the same time he also offers more width naturally than the standard WB who sits slightly more narrower. He's more focused on play in the final third compared to the WB which has a more natural split between defensive and attacking responsibility. But they both do very simliar things.

Thanks. Traditionally I've been hesitant on using the role due to its instructions to 'roam from position' and other demands that may cause more harm than good if I don't have a good player.

I'll give it a shot as I'll need the CWB's contribution in the final third, and if he's more focused on the attack than a classic WB then it should be a good option. If he messes around too much I'll limit his freedom  

[Mr_Demus]

23 hours ago, kingjericho said:

I always think of Marcelo/Dani Alves as the prototypes for the CWB role, hence using more limited players makes me think twice. I'd like to get some wingers to play there, they seem a perfect fit as long as their defensive ability isn't completely useless.

Thanks. Traditionally I've been hesitant on using the role due to its instructions to 'roam from position' and other demands that may cause more harm than good if I don't have a good player.

I'll give it a shot as I'll need the CWB's contribution in the final third, and if he's more focused on the attack than a classic WB then it should be a good option. If he messes around too much I'll limit his freedom  

I am playing this formation with Bristol City. My backs are performing very well as CWB's, even though they aren't top class players.

I also used it at PSV Eindhoven, and found my CWB's to be goalscoring threats, so it might be nice for them to have good heading and/or finishing.

 

I have made smalle changes to the midfield though, as i play with BBM (S) - DLP (S) - CM (A)

[quintonkemen]

Is there a chance this thread will be continued anytime soon ? I know you are really busy at the moment, cleon, with your new website and stuff. But i would love to read more about how you approach the game generally !
Can you suggest any good read, about how to sort out staff and handle finances at lower league level ? I'm having problems with this, dont know what to do with my staff and keep track of my budget at the same time