Chalk & Cheese

[jozza800]

Currently suffering quite a drop after winning the title with my Gothenberg side.

It's my third year, the first year I played very deep and direct and it did ok. We finished 3rd. The following season we were predicted 2nd favs, I still played direct but not quite so deep and with two very fast forwards and DLP just pinging balls over the top. The kind of football I've really struggled with in this version. I finished the season unbeaten and only drew 3 of my 30 games.

THis season, we were favs for the title but it hasnt gone to plan at all. And from what I can see teams aren't particularly more defensive. Even those that did play defensive last season we demolished. I just cant understand how there can be such a big drop off from one season to the next ( i understand in real life, but this is a game).

 My DLP - The two season's previous he was stellar. This season his numbers are no where near

 

Last season's top scorer - has 1 goal this season and that came from him filling in on the wing for a game

 

The numbers are so different that there is something underlying that isnt working for this season to the last. I could understand it if I'd taken say Burnley to winning the league from 16th. But we were already in the top 2 favs for the league, I've not just catipulted them from nowhere and teams are playing more cautiously.

 

This is what won me the title last season - Where can I make more effective without losing the 442 direct sort of attacking.

 

 

[crusadertsar]

Why are you using two attacking strikers. Any effective striker partnership is usually made up of one who attacks space and one who supports him.

Edited September 10, 2020 by crusadertsar

[jozza800]

In my first season, I flipped between a DLF and F9 but he continually got poor ratings. In my second (title winning and unbeaten season) I played with 2 out and out fowards. The left forward peels wide and the right forward has take more risks.

THe idea was that the midfield just drop grendades over the opposition for the pacey forwards to latch onto. And that is esentially what happened all season. Not so this season.

Edited September 10, 2020 by jozza800

[crusadertsar]

7 minutes ago, jozza800 said:

In my first season, I flipped between a DLF and F9 but he continually got poor ratings. In my second (title winning and unbeaten season) I played with 2 out and out fowards. The left forward peels wide and the right forward has take more risks.

THe idea was that the midfield just drop grendades over the opposition for the pacey forwards to latch onto. And that is esentially what happened all season. Not so this season.

I don't know to me it just suggests that the two front players are totally isolated. That could be the source of your problems. And added to that the fact that your reputation increased so teams probably are more defensive and more focused on targeting your strikers.

Edited September 10, 2020 by crusadertsar

[jozza800]

3 minutes ago, crusadertsar said:

I don't know to me it just suggests that the two front players are totally isolated. That could be the source of your problems. And added to that the fact that your reputation increased so teams probably are more defensive and more focused on targeting your strikers.

That's the bit that I'm struggling with. They were already doing that in my unbeaten season. Teams would sometimes sit deep but it still worked. 

[crusadertsar]

5 minutes ago, jozza800 said:

That's the bit that I'm struggling with. They were already doing that in my unbeaten season. Teams would sometimes sit deep but it still worked. 

That's why it's always good idea to use one striker to make space for the goal-scoring one. I don't think False9 or DLF makes much sense because of your chosen style of play. But maybe a PF on support would work or even Tagetman on Attack duty. Of course you would need to find players to fit those roles. 

[Experienced Defender]

8 hours ago, jozza800 said:

 

8 hours ago, jozza800 said:

THis season, we were favs for the title but it hasnt gone to plan at all

I'll focus on this for now. If your team was considered the favorite to win the title, than playing counter-attacking football - which your tactic essentially is - does not look like a logical idea. Simply because it's reasonable to assume that most of the opposition will play defensively against you, which means there is hardly going to be space for your team to benefit from counter-attacking. 

I think that's the first thing you should think about, before discussing potential weaknesses of your tactic in general. 

[_Daniel_]

The tactic is very one dimensional and too negative for a team defending the title. I would start by adjusting the line of engagement as teams will just be sitting back and killing the clock. Possibly try standard line of engagement and counter pressing. In addition, both strikers move into channels, try making the right sided one a poacher so he stays central.

The other things you could try is playing at a higher tempo to catch teams in transition and getting the LFB to overlap, to pull the defense out of shape a bit.

[Jean0987654321]

I would change the striker pairings as the others as mentioned. Maybe make one a PF (s) and make him Roam and Run down the channels to pull some defenders away.

 

[jozza800]

20 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

 

I'll focus on this for now. If your team was considered the favorite to win the title, than playing counter-attacking football - which your tactic essentially is - does not look like a logical idea. Simply because it's reasonable to assume that most of the opposition will play defensively against you, which means there is hardly going to be space for your team to benefit from counter-attacking. 

I think that's the first thing you should think about, before discussing potential weaknesses of your tactic in general. 

I appreciate that - but the season before I was 3rd favs and teams were playing defensively and the tactic worled very well. Teams didn't appear to play much differently the following season.

[Experienced Defender]

21 minutes ago, jozza800 said:

I appreciate that - but the season before I was 3rd favs and teams were playing defensively and the tactic worled very well. Teams didn't appear to play much differently the following season.

Okay, but even so, there is definitely room for improvement in your tactic. 

[denen123]

Of course there are some holes in the tactic. Especially, given the number of "counter-attacking" footy, however, I don't think using two of the same type of player is ,essentially, bad.

Both might have different attributes/PPM's & will execute the role differently. 

[_Daniel_]

6 hours ago, jozza800 said:

I appreciate that - but the season before I was 3rd favs and teams were playing defensively and the tactic worled very well. Teams didn't appear to play much differently the following season.

What differences are you noticing? Obviously the DLP and STR aren't producing, but are they still playing the same way and just missing chances? or have the chances dried up? 

[jozza800]

12 hours ago, _Daniel_ said:

What differences are you noticing? Obviously the DLP and STR aren't producing, but are they still playing the same way and just missing chances? or have the chances dried up? 

I did notice that the finishing was poorer. I don't know if statistically that was the case but there appeared to be far more tame efforts (not just from strikers). And hitting the woodwork went through the roof!