Am I being too defensive? Can't score!!

[jujigatame]

So I'm managing Everton, and in my 2nd season I am massively underperforming in the league, mostly because I'm only scoring 1 goal/game.  My tactic looks like this:

               AFa
IFs          AMs          IFs
        DLPd   BWMd

FBa    CDd   CDd   FBa

Mentality is balanced.  Very few TIs, only counter, play out of defense, and more urgent pressing.  Sometimes I've switched from AF to DLF or switched one of the IFs to a winger, but this doesn't seem to make much difference.  In particular my STC and AMC positions seem to be ineffectual and get awful ratings.  They are routinely scoring in the 6.4-6.7 range.  All my good attacking play comes from the wings, either the IFs or FBs.

Ultimately I feel like I have good attacking talent and this tactic should be sufficient to allow me to score a good number of goals without attacking roles in the midfield.  But it just isn't happening.  I get tons of games where I have maybe 60% possession and superior pass completion, but I create the same very small number of chances as my opponents and end up in 1-1 draws or 0-1 losses.  It's been extremely frustrating as I'm probably close to being sacked which has never, ever happened to me in 9 years of FM play.

One weird anomaly is that this isn't happening in Europa League play.  There I've scored 12 in 4 games, most of which were actually against a very good Roma side.  Perhaps it's just a smaller sample size and I've been lucky there.  Not sure.

[sporadicsmiles]

I do not think it looks too bad. The obvious thing for me is you are isolating the AF(A) by having only support duties behind him. You could try to play around with the roles/duties in the AM strata of your side.

Since you play with two defensive central midfielders, did you think about using two DMCs instead, but giving them slightly more expansive roles? You then get the defensive solidity to your side, but you maybe can find something different for the players to offer in attack.

[achillesdindane]

I think you should try to have a positive mentality instead of balanced for Everton. Having FB and IF will make you lose a lot in the wings as there will be no wing support. You either choose to have wing backs or wingers. Another problem might be that both midfielders are defensive minded and not supporting the front line. Leaving the attacking to only 4 people. So to sum up: I would propose below;

               AFa
Wa/s          APa          Wa/s
        DLPd   BBMs

WBs    CDd   BPDd   WBS

[summatsupeer]

The main thing that leaps out to me is two IF-S  with an AM-S.  I think it will get a bit congested with them trying to use same area.  When that IF-S runs inside what do the AM-S and other IF-S provide?

Could one of the wide players stay wide or take more risks with earlier runs for a switch of play?

Basically with a DLP and two IF-S I don't think there's a lot the AM-S can do.  I guess the knock on effect is the AF is either isolated and not getting many touches and/or shooting from low quality chances.

[Johnny Ace]

I'd look to have an attacking WB on the left with a winger on attack over on the right for bit of variation 

[Fosse]

The movement from the three behind the striker is going to be very similar as they'll mostly not look to get in behind and offer a shirt option, an attack duty out wide will provide more penetration and variation

[jujigatame]

5 hours ago, achillesdindane said:

I think you should try to have a positive mentality instead of balanced for Everton. Having FB and IF will make you lose a lot in the wings as there will be no wing support. You either choose to have wing backs or wingers. Another problem might be that both midfielders are defensive minded and not supporting the front line. Leaving the attacking to only 4 people. So to sum up: I would propose below;

               AFa
Wa/s          APa          Wa/s
        DLPd   BBMs

WBs    CDd   BPDd   WBS

I'm not sure I get the FB vs. WB thing.  When I put Digne and Coleman as my FBa players, they are constantly bombing down the wings and putting in crosses.  They tend to get better ratings than the rest of my team.

When I play Walcott I change the AMR to a Ws but that doesn't seem to make a material difference in chance creation.

[jujigatame]

48 minutes ago, Fosse said:

The movement from the three behind the striker is going to be very similar as they'll mostly not look to get in behind and offer a shirt option, an attack duty out wide will provide more penetration and variation

I have experimented with switching an IFs to IFa and switching the FB on the same side to FBs.  Aside from a couple of instances where the IF went on an amazing dribbling run and scored himself, if anything this change seems to have a negative effect on chance creation because the FB stays deeper and I have no width when the defense inevitably packs the box.

That seems to be the primary issue, actually.  Defenses in FM19 play super deep and narrow and my central attackers don't seem to know how to deal with this.

[Experienced Defender]

I suppose what you are trying to achieve with this setup of roles and duties - attacking fullbacks overlapping the IFs and putting crosses into the box for the lone striker who should hopefully convert some of these into goals, while having both CMs on defend duty is supposed to provide defensive cover for the fullbacks bombing forward. In theory, it may look like a decent strategy, but there are two major problems: 1) the tactic is too much one-dimensional and hence predictable, and 2) the striker, as the only forward player on attack duty, is very much isolated, especially with the AF role, which is the most attack-minded of all striker roles in the game. 

Moreover, from my knowledge of the current Everton squad in FM19, I think your players are better suited for the deeper version of 4231 (with DMs instead CMs), and you can play a very nice counter-attacking football with this team. But if you nevertheless want to use a standard 4231, then I would suggest that you create a slightly more "asymmetric" setup of roles and duties - not asymmetric in terms of formation (positions), but distribution of roles/duties. I'll now give you an example of what it may look like, just to make it easier for you to understand what I mean:

PFa/DLFa

IFs      APMs       Wa

CMd      BtBM

FBa    CD    CD    WBs

A more defensive version could use a WB (or IWB) on defend duty on the right side. Of course, there are various combinations that can work, and which one would be the "best" for your team depends on what kind of players you have in your squad at the moment.