Not sure how to get the best out of a world class midfield

[nick1408]

So, I have managed to acquire some real talent for the middle of the park. That isn't to say the rest of the team isn't quality, it just means the players I have got didn't fit the 4-1-4-1 I was playing. As such I've had to adjust my tactic to suit the players. The problem is, I'm not at a bit of a loss.

 

At the start of the 2020/21 season I had Rabiot, Tonali, Fekir and Tousart to fit into a midfield. No issues - a a 4-4-2 narrow diamond or 4-3-1-2 should suit plus I have a Portuguese striker coming on that switching to a two striker system would suit. Well, I couldn't get it working so switched to a 3-5-2 with Tonali as a libero. This worked really well until I got Lemar in January 2021. Now I have decided to try a more possession-based system:

 

 

I've told the two AP's to stay wider and the CMd to take more risks.  Reasons are as follows:

 

Advanced Playmakers - My thinking is having two guys that are high and wide (relatively) that attract the ball will leave space in the middle for the striker and AMC to attack. AP's also cut inside so will offer secondary options for scoring when not on the ball.

Central Midfielder (defend) - Tonali is really good at defending the middle and also has great vision, passing, decisions and composure. He is given the licence to have a playmaker's passing range without attracting the ball.

 

I didn't want the CMd to be attracting the ball as I felt it would take away from the wide possession play I am after. The problem is, It feels a little disjointed. I can't put my finger on it. Tousart does get forward whenever possible (thanks @Rashidi for your videos and tips, especially the FM University one recently) so I feel once that trait is gone it may make the tactic ebb and flow a bit easier. I also went for FB's instead of WB's as I felt I didn't want the full backs high when supporting as the AM strata and CM strata are plenty high enough that I didn't need even more players clogging up the space. I did smash Manchester City 4-1 but one swallow doesn't make a summer. I am not thinking this is the finished product yet.

 

With the players I have (what is pictured is more or less my starting XI) is there something I should consider or is my idea of wide possession a bit far-fetched for what I have?

[Experienced Defender]

The key issues of your tactic are:

- it's too one-dimensional

- lacking deep runners to provide any meaningful support in the final third

- lower LOE makes sense when you want to play counter-attacking football, but your tactic isn't quite counter-attacking (and you don't even use the the Counter TI in transition), aside from the "Hit early crosses" and higher tempo, which can be considered "counter-attacking" instructions, but are on the other hand negated by other elements of your tactic. And btw, counter-press does not go hand in hand with a counter-attack-based style, in addition to making you defensively vulnerable more than it's necessary.

[jorgvandervloed]

You use two playmakers on the flanks, but have no runners that support them. Your two cms are holding, TM is dropping deeper, and your fullbacks are generally coming from pretty deep. Who are they going to play their passes to? Who are going to score for you?

next to that, I believe that your midfield will be way too crowded. APs cutting inside, TM dropping deeper, and your AM + MCs are there as well.

Try to visualize how you are going to keep possession and create chances through different ways of attacking

[nick1408]

Maybe the BWM needs to be a CMs with playmaker PI’s to provide some support in the CM strata. 

 

Wouldnt the AM provide run into the box?  

 

Should i I consider one (or both) AP’s to have the roaming instruction (I can’t remember if it’s hard coded)?  

 

To provide runners into the box box should I reconsider the CM’s and AM and go for a DM and More attacking CM’s instead?  I don’t think this is a good option for the striker I have as I think he needs support. I did start him as a TMa but found he performed better as a support player. I think maybe a shadow striker may help in this particular instance. 

 

I thinnk i want want to play possession based soccer with the players I have. I went lower LOE simply to keep the gap between defence and midfield smaller. It was something pointed out by @Rashidi in a recent video and makes sense. I get that lower tempo may make more sense. I guess I was thinking that with a higher tempo I would not give teams a chance to regroup (I.e. counter-attack). I think I may be able to achieve the same thing with lower tempo but counter press. 

[Experienced Defender]

Lower LOE does make you more compact vertically, but is not suitable for possession-based football you want to play. A combo of much higher DL and higher LOE would be as vertically compact as your current setting, but makes more sense in a possession style. On the other hand, it makes you more vulnerable to opposition balls over the top (here you need to consider the quality of your defense, i.e. their ability to deal with this kind of threat).

Higher tempo is not something that would prevent teams from counter-attacking you. To the contrary, with higher tempo, your players move the ball more quickly around, which actually increases the risk that they could make a mistake, lose the ball and thus give the opposition an opportunity for the counter. But it does not mean that you should not play on higher tempo. It just means that you need to consider all elements of a tactic as integral parts of a system, not in isolation.

9 hours ago, nick1408 said:

a chance to regroup (I.e. counter-attack)

Regroup(ing) and counter(attack) are two different things. While both relate to transition, the regroup has to do with defensive transitions, whereas the counter affects attacking transitions.

9 hours ago, nick1408 said:

I think I may be able to achieve the same thing with lower tempo but counter press. 

Tempo and counter-press are different types of instructions. Counter-press can be very risky, because if it fails, your defense can find itself badly exposed. Rather than counter-press, I would consider what Rashidi calls "split press".