Changing Philosophy

[davehanson]

Good afternoon.

I have wondered for a while now if people change their team's philosophy for different scenarios at all, or if people always stick to just one philosophy regardless of the scenario, opposition or tactic you are employing.

It would seem logical in some ways, to me at least, that if you plan to use an attacking tactic you would use a fluid philosophy. Likewise if you are using a defensive tactic you would probably use a rigid philosophy.

However, does the game punish you for doing this? Do your players either get confused by swapping philosophy's or do they not 'gel'?

When I bought the game, before reading TT&F, I swapped philosophy's to suit the way I wanted to play. So, if I played defensive I used a rigid or very rigid philosophy and if I wanted to be attacking I would use a fluid philosophy. I found however that this approach did not bring very good results. This could be partly to do with not having a very good team at the time.

I would like some other people's views on this and any thoughts you may have.

[celebritykiller]

I set free roles/roaming manually and then set a philosophy based on number of free roles I have: the more free roles I have the more rigid the philosophy (to balance it out)

[Ari Gold]

I never ever change my philosophy. I will change my starting strategy (though it's not really a starting strategy once the game has started!) but only ever to one that is more aggressive (I start on control). I have no idea if this is actually something the game recognizes, but I want my team to always, always play a dominant, attack-minded game with short sharp passing (basically a hyper-Barcelona). By never changing the way I play, I figure they'll get even better at playing to this style. Plus, if they are used to this style, then changing it is only asking for trouble IMO. Like I said, I have no idea if the game recognizes this at all, but it makes sense to me.

Also, when playing a fluid strategy, or basically any system where you want free flowing football, then I consider the following to be complete no-no's.

A striker in the target man role.

Advanced playmaker role.

Deep-Lying playmaker roles.

Any player set as target-man in the team instructions.

Any player set as playmaker in the team instructions.

All of the above encourage the team to look to get the ball to a particular player. In a fluid philosophy, IMO you just want to get it to the right player. Asking the team to look to pass to someone just hinders that IMO. Again, I have no idea if and how this works in the game.

[Motcha]

I do it all the time for every single game and for every single situation I face in the game.

IMO the strongest team is the one that is the most flexible.

I look at the team I'm going to play and look at how I can exploit their weaknesses. Playing a defensive strategy does not mean you will be focusing on defense.

I managed to beat West Ham 5-0 at my home using a counter philosophy.

The idea is to exploit the oppositions technical and physical deficiencies.

[lam]

I start with balanced on all occassions and then adjust if I feel it needs it.

I think about it when I am playing a controling game and thins are just not coming together, but I dont feel that attacking will work. At this stage I might move up to fluid.

A similar thing happens if I am trying to hold out in a game where its close. I might switch down to rigid.

LAM

[Fabio MVP]

I play Very Rigid with my Man Utd team and my average win is 3-1. Philosophy almost has nothing to do with strategy. I play Control most of the time, and scoring for fun.

I also don't get caught on counter and I'm not getting through balls against me too, so the opp. strikers don't have much one on one chances.

If you like your players to play excatly like you set them up (like I do) then you should use Very Rigid. And if you like your players to play with a lot of creative freedom then use Fluid.

But, you can still gain the Fluid football effect by using Very Rigid. You do that by putting: Creative Freedom to More Expressive and Roaming to More Roaming.