Is 433 patient (but not possesion) suitable? Player screenshots provided

[Mr_Demus]

I play as Odd in the Norwegian top league. 

My first 20 games my record was 11-8-1 38-17 (1.9-0.85 pr. match)

Last 10 games: 3-0-7 14-22 (1.4-2.2 pr. match)

We dropped from 1st to 7th in that span. So frustrating.

 

Obviously, my goals scored dropped a bit, but goals conceded went through the roof.

Two of my defenders are pretty old. Could their physical decline lead to the downfall of my style of play? Or were the first 20 games simply a fluke?

It clearly has it flaws, as I apparently suck at tactics and likely the game in general.

I tried going basic only adding two TI's (shorter passing is missing in this image)

PI's:

AML - Sit narrower, close down more

AMR - close down more

ST - close down more

 

I used the split block, as I like to press high on the opposing defence, but I don't want every player constantly chasing the ball. Shorter passing I added, as I wanted a more patient approach, but not necessarily just keeping the ball.

 

Sit narrower for the AML I added to add some attacking to central areas, due to playing on the same side as the DLP.

 

[Freakiie]

How was your player body language during that time? I'm not a specialist regarding the Norwegian league, but considering their reputation Odd are one of the bigger clubs, but not whom you'd generally consider title challengers? Could be that some title pressure started kicking in as you headed closer towards the end of the season while performing above expectations? Alternatively, teams might've started adjusting their mentality when facing you, but considering you should already be one of the bigger clubs that seems unlikely. Could also be some complacency kicking in as you were performing very well that was not handled properly.

As for the tactical part, I'm not a big fan of that midfield 3, they're all... very similar. Your holding player is the DLP(s), but he still has a relatively high mentality, so I wouldn't rely on him as my main holding man in midfield (And a lot of DLPs are lackluster defensively to begin with, although I don't know what yours looks like). On the other hand, the DM(s) and CM(s) will probably try to do the same things as the roles look very similar. I'm guessing all three will regularly clump up together trying to support your attacks from deep in very similar positions. Personally I'd look into a proper defensive minded role and player for the DM position, especially with you struggling defensively and the second CM can then slot into a role that will push forwards more aggressively to add some extra dynamic to your attacks.

Also, even with the DLP on that side, the left flank might leave you too exposed, as the DLP(s) might not be that great of a defensive option. That's something you'd have to judge yourself by watching your games though.

[Guv'nor]

Watch the highlights on Comprehensive and you'll have all the answers desired. If the highlight show wave after wave of opposition attacks, with each reel starting your half, implies they're transitioning to attack with relative ease. The elixir in such instances lies in the line of engagement and pressing intensity. Of course adjustments in either will need reciprocal changes in player roles. 

 

[Experienced Defender]

I cannot know the reason why you suddenly started losing after such a good start. Instead, I can only tell you what in my personal view are potential issues/flaws in the tactic you posted:

- a combo of CM on support and IW also on support can lead to needless congestion in the final third and a "clash" of sorts between the two

- insufficient central penetration (I think it's obvious why)

- IF on attack and PF on attack are usually not an optimal partnership (either change the IF into IW or PF into a more creator type of role - DLF, CF or TQ, depending on the player)

- FB on support is a bit too conservative to properly support his inside-oriented wide partner (referring to the FBsu-IW partnership on the right flank)

What is good in your setup is the selection of roles and duties on the left - IFat + DLPsu + WBsu 

[wpmk]

Just a couple of things for feedback. What stands out to me is there isn’t a clear vision of how you want your team to play which makes it difficult to give meaningful feedback. Do you want your team to be proactive or reactive? Controlled possession or sharp counter? What are your team’s strengths and weaknesses and how is that reflected in your tactic?

At the moment, it feels rudderless which may have got you through the first set of games but isn’t guiding you through this difficult patch. I think having that North Star and a clear set of principles really helps you in the decision-making process for coming up with a tactic your team can work towards. But also in your squad building and recruitment.

Secondly, when you do have that vision for Odd laid out in your TIs, you need to work on the player roles. Think beyond the basic shape and try to extrapolate what kind of movement you’ll get from the roles and duties. At the moment, I don’t see much combination play, especially for the middle three.

There are a lot of guides here that talk about combinations but also tactical balance. In the midfield three, you need a player supporting and joining attacks, you need a ball carrier, and you need a player supporting the defence during possession turnover. At the moment, you have three midfielders occupying that part of the pitch but not much more.  

Think of combinations of play throughout all the roles e.g. striker dropping into the hole for inside forward to exploit space in behind, and consequently the full back can overlap to provide width. Again, these decisions can be guided by your tactical vision for Odd.

Hope that helps!

[phd_angel]

These slumps happen with me often and are frustrating!

Sometimes, setting your weekly training schedule with 3 days of full rest, or sending the entire main squad 3 days off training on vacation, or sending a couple of players out on vacation for a full week - any of these may help a bit.

Communicate with your players when they are not playing well. Disciplinary fines of up to 1 week salary also help (but if you fine 2 weeks salary they will complain and may become unhappy).

Finally, if you keep the same tactics all season long, the competition (AI) will find out and become more difficult. So, you need to trick them with minor changes...

I try something to reboot the team physically and mentally helps...

 

[Mr_Demus]

13 hours ago, Freakiie said:

How was your player body language during that time? I'm not a specialist regarding the Norwegian league, but considering their reputation Odd are one of the bigger clubs, but not whom you'd generally consider title challengers? Could be that some title pressure started kicking in as you headed closer towards the end of the season while performing above expectations? Alternatively, teams might've started adjusting their mentality when facing you, but considering you should already be one of the bigger clubs that seems unlikely. Could also be some complacency kicking in as you were performing very well that was not handled properly.

This might play a part. Never thought of that.

 

13 hours ago, Freakiie said:

As for the tactical part, I'm not a big fan of that midfield 3, they're all... very similar. Your holding player is the DLP(s), but he still has a relatively high mentality, so I wouldn't rely on him as my main holding man in midfield (And a lot of DLPs are lackluster defensively to begin with, although I don't know what yours looks like). On the other hand, the DM(s) and CM(s) will probably try to do the same things as the roles look very similar. I'm guessing all three will regularly clump up together trying to support your attacks from deep in very similar positions. Personally I'd look into a proper defensive minded role and player for the DM position, especially with you struggling defensively and the second CM can then slot into a role that will push forwards more aggressively to add some extra dynamic to your attacks.

Yeah, I thought of that. But pretty much all of their CM's are similar in mold. Playmakers who, at best, are decent at defending. I thought, I'll bring someone in mid season, but then I had success and didn't want to change a lot.

 

12 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

- IF on attack and PF on attack are usually not an optimal partnership (either change the IF into IW or PF into a more creator type of role - DLF, CF or TQ, depending on the player)

My striker scored a ton of goals, so I am reluctant to change his role, as I worry he will be less of a threat. But I will experiment with a IF/DLF and a IW/PF combo to see what works.

 

12 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

FB on support is a bit too conservative to properly support his inside-oriented wide partner (referring to the FBsu-IW partnership on the right flank)

WB S could be better I guess, but then I would be better off changing either the DM of MCR to a defend duty, right?

How about my midfield trio? How would you set that up?

[Experienced Defender]

6 minutes ago, Mr_Demus said:

WB S could be better I guess, but then I would be better off changing either the DM of MCR to a defend duty, right?

I personally would rather change the IW into standard winger and then switch the CM's duty to attack (instead of support), while leaving the fullback unchanged.

When it comes to the DM, I would play him on defend duty anyway. 

8 minutes ago, Mr_Demus said:

How about my midfield trio? How would you set that up?

Based on what I just wrote above, this would be my preferred setup:

                          Wsu

 DLPsu  CMat

          DMde

                         FBsu

(Assuming that your players are not good enough for a more risky and adventurous setup)

[Mr_Demus]

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

I personally would rather change the IW into standard winger and then switch the CM's duty to attack (instead of support), while leaving the fullback unchanged.

When it comes to the DM, I would play him on defend duty anyway. 

Based on what I just wrote above, this would be my preferred setup:

                          Wsu

 DLPsu  CMat

          DMde

                         FBsu

(Assuming that your players are not good enough for a more risky and adventurous setup)

That looks really good, and not far off my current setup. I will try that out.

 

 

Let's entertain the thought of a more adventurous setup. How would that look?

Edited April 2, 2021 by Mr_Demus

[Experienced Defender]

Just one question: why did you changed passing to shorter?

I am asking because that setup is not optimally suited to a short-passing game. It may work, but probably not on a consistent basis and smoothly enough. 

2 hours ago, Mr_Demus said:

Let's entertain the thought of a more adventurous setup. How would that look?

                         IWsu

DLPsu  MEZat

          HB

                         WBsu

Also good tactical balance, but more demanding in terms of players' quality.

[Mr_Demus]

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

Just one question: why did you changed passing to shorter?

I am asking because that setup is not optimally suited to a short-passing game. It may work, but probably not on a consistent basis and smoothly enough. 

                         IWsu

DLPsu  MEZat

          HB

                         WBsu

Also good tactical balance, but more demanding in terms of players' quality.

To make build up more patient, but not a possession based setup.

Would it be better to just move passing to standard/mixed (whatever default is called)?

I had shorter passing in the stup in the OP as well, but I forgot to add it in the screenshot after tinkering.

Edited April 2, 2021 by Mr_Demus

[Experienced Defender]

7 minutes ago, Mr_Demus said:

To make build up more patient, but not a possession based setup.

Would it be better to just move passing to standard/mixed (whatever default is called)?

You can set team passing to standard/default and then set the CBs and DM to shorter passing in their PIs. And the keeper as well.

[Mr_Demus]

Just now, Experienced Defender said:

You can set team passing to standard/default and then set the CBs and DM to shorter passing in their PIs. And the keeper as well.

Cheers. Will try that.

A very sincere thank you for taking the time to help all of us lost people on here.

[Mr_Demus]

I don't get this game. I can't get anything nearly successful going. Above average squad. Simple tactics. Crap results.

My tactics makes sense. I am pretty sure it fits my players. My striker has gone from 22 league goals last year to 1 goal in 10 games. We create very little of quality.

I don't understand.

[HUNT3R]

2 hours ago, Mr_Demus said:

I don't get this game. I can't get anything nearly successful going. Above average squad. Simple tactics. Crap results.

My tactics makes sense. I am pretty sure it fits my players. My striker has gone from 22 league goals last year to 1 goal in 10 games. We create very little of quality.

I don't understand.

Since this is the tactics section - is it possible to talk about the tactical side of this issue?

What is the tactic? Where did you finish last season? Where are you predicted to finish this season? How are you doing in the league? What issues have you seen?

[13th Man]

Those times when things just won't work are so frustrating!

I know Experienced Defender is the main man around here and I'm just a longtime lurker coming out of hiding recently, but I have to respectfully disagree with his opposition to the IF(a) with a PF(a) in a 4-3-3.  I've had a lot of success with that set up with a style that sounds very similar to what you're looking for, as long as there's not also a CM in the same area.  I've found that the IF(a) acts kind of like a second striker and often comes in from dangerous positions and at speed (depending on the player's attributes), and the wingback provides good support on the wing.  I also personally just don't like straight wingers in a 4-3-3 unless they have a tendency to get in the on the playmaking side as well as the crossing.  It leaves the forward too isolated and while you can have some success overloading the flank with the fullback, your striker and/or IF have to be able to successfully get on the end of those crosses and will often be outnumbered.

I too like a patient build up without going full on possession heavy (my current save is super possession heavy, but that's due to the players not my preferred style!).  Especially for that, I don't like shorter passing.  Going with a mixed passing range gives your players the flexibility to choose the best option.  Just to give you an idea of a tactic I've found very successful in the 4-3-3 that you here's one I used with in fm20 and fm19 (so might need some tweaks).  It was with Southampton in the Premier League, and I used it when we were an underdog side and as we got into the CL spots.  I did start to use a CF or AF instead of a PF depending on the player and our relative quality, but the PF was effective too.  Note - this is not to hijack the thread but to give a sense of the balance/roles that I've found successful and that sound similar to what the OP is looking for.

PF(a)

IF(a)                          IF(s)

CM(s)  MEZ(s)

DLP(d)

WB(s) CB(d) CB(d) WB(s)

SK(d)

Mentality - Positive.

In Possession - Higher tempo, wide width

In transition - Distribute to CBs and WBs, distribute quickly, (sometimes, depending on opponents) counter and/or counterpress

Out of Possession - Higher defensive line, (sometimes for possession heavy sides) prevent short keeper distribution

(Roles do chance over time. I was also successful with a BBM in place of the MEZ, but you do need a runner coming up in support.  The DLP position can also be switched in the midfield strata as well.)

 

 

[Mr_Demus]

13 hours ago, HUNT3R said:

Since this is the tactics section - is it possible to talk about the tactical side of this issue?

What is the tactic? Where did you finish last season? Where are you predicted to finish this season? How are you doing in the league? What issues have you seen?

First season. Tactics was the one in the OP. Predicted 5th. Finished 7th.

Second season: Tactics is the one suggested by ED, as posted by me later in the thread. Predicted 5th. Currently in 11th place after 10 games, and I still have all the top teams to play in the first round of games. 

 

I am not seeing much tbh. My strikers efficiency has falled of a cliff, and his conversion rate is terrible. We create chances, but not of a great quality compared to last season, as there are less highlight worthy chances for my team. 

Players, who have not been instructed to play short, often play terrible short passes into the feet of opponents.

Often I am hit on the counter, so I could lower the DL to standard, but that would remove ideal compactness unless I lower LOE, which is not what I want.

We are one of the best passing outfits in the league, but don't have much pace overall.

[Mr_Demus]

Tactics that I have been using this season:

 

GK:

Spoiler

 

Defence:

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

 

Midfield (DM/MC):

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

 

Strikers/Wingers:

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

 

 

So these are my players. If anyone wants to have a look, it would be very welcome.

Lunetta has played left back, because John Kitolano has been out for nearly a year. Also, my board sold my starting right back 12 hours before the transfer deadline, and I couldn't get a replacement in in time, so Gregersen has played full back.

Lauritsen scored 22 goals in 27 league games last year as a PF A in the tactic posted in the OP.

[Mr_Demus]

7 hours ago, 13th Man said:

Those times when things just won't work are so frustrating!

I know Experienced Defender is the main man around here and I'm just a longtime lurker coming out of hiding recently, but I have to respectfully disagree with his opposition to the IF(a) with a PF(a) in a 4-3-3.  I've had a lot of success with that set up with a style that sounds very similar to what you're looking for, as long as there's not also a CM in the same area.  I've found that the IF(a) acts kind of like a second striker and often comes in from dangerous positions and at speed (depending on the player's attributes), and the wingback provides good support on the wing.  I also personally just don't like straight wingers in a 4-3-3 unless they have a tendency to get in the on the playmaking side as well as the crossing.  It leaves the forward too isolated and while you can have some success overloading the flank with the fullback, your striker and/or IF have to be able to successfully get on the end of those crosses and will often be outnumbered.

I too like a patient build up without going full on possession heavy (my current save is super possession heavy, but that's due to the players not my preferred style!).  Especially for that, I don't like shorter passing.  Going with a mixed passing range gives your players the flexibility to choose the best option.  Just to give you an idea of a tactic I've found very successful in the 4-3-3 that you here's one I used with in fm20 and fm19 (so might need some tweaks).  It was with Southampton in the Premier League, and I used it when we were an underdog side and as we got into the CL spots.  I did start to use a CF or AF instead of a PF depending on the player and our relative quality, but the PF was effective too.  Note - this is not to hijack the thread but to give a sense of the balance/roles that I've found successful and that sound similar to what the OP is looking for.

PF(a)

IF(a)                          IF(s)

CM(s)  MEZ(s)

DLP(d)

WB(s) CB(d) CB(d) WB(s)

SK(d)

Mentality - Positive.

In Possession - Higher tempo, wide width

In transition - Distribute to CBs and WBs, distribute quickly, (sometimes, depending on opponents) counter and/or counterpress

Out of Possession - Higher defensive line, (sometimes for possession heavy sides) prevent short keeper distribution

(Roles do chance over time. I was also successful with a BBM in place of the MEZ, but you do need a runner coming up in support.  The DLP position can also be switched in the midfield strata as well.)

 

 

Regarding the part about IF A/PF A - Last year my IF A and PF scored a lot of goals with a CM S. As soon as I changed to CM A, they stopped scoring. But a CM S gives me no penetration from the CM strata at all.

It looks decent. Might give it a go.

If you move the DLP to regular CM, what would you play in the DM position?

[Tsuru]

I have been using a 4-3-3 for a season and a half and I agree with @13th Man, I also don´t like traditional wingers on this formation. They can work, of course, but their most successful rates with me have been when they enter inside the box and kick to goal instead of crossing. They tend to isolate the single striker and, when you are trying to be the proactive team opponents will usually crowd their box with players so the crosses will bounce and return.

However I prefer a balanced duty pair, that is, one striker in attack and the other one on support. So I would try PF-A/IF-S or PF-S/IF-A. I always think that this balance of roles gives you more movement and options, as one striker will be more focused on scoring goals and the other one can support him. 

I also believe that, when you are trying to attack, opponents will employ a defensive strategy against you, that is, they will try to deny any available spaces. So you will need some movement to unlock defences. Very hard coded players or little movement can lead to that "hit the wall" feeling.

Regarding the DMC, when you don´t know what role to choose you can always use a DM-D, simple and effective.

[Mr_Demus]

6 minutes ago, Tsuru said:

I have been using a 4-3-3 for a season and a half and I agree with @13th Man, I also don´t like traditional wingers on this formation. They can work, of course, but their most successful rates with me have been when they enter inside the box and kick to goal instead of crossing. They tend to isolate the single striker and, when you are trying to be the proactive team opponents will usually crowd their box with players so the crosses will bounce and return.

However I prefer a balanced duty pair, that is, one striker in attack and the other one on support. So I would try PF-A/IF-S or PF-S/IF-A. I always think that this balance of roles gives you more movement and options, as one striker will be more focused on scoring goals and the other one can support him. 

I also believe that, when you are trying to attack, opponents will employ a defensive strategy against you, that is, they will try to deny any available spaces. So you will need some movement to unlock defences. Very hard coded players or little movement can lead to that "hit the wall" feeling.

Regarding the DMC, when you don´t know what role to choose you can always use a DM-D, simple and effective.

I have tried: IF A/PF A, IF A/DLF A, IF S/PF A, IW S/PF A, IW A/DLF S. The only one that has lead to goals from the striker is IF A/PF A. But that was without the CM A. So some of the less successful combinations, might work if I alter the CM A

[Tsuru]

1 hora atrás, Mr_Demus disse:

I have tried: IF A/PF A, IF A/DLF A, IF S/PF A, IW S/PF A, IW A/DLF S. The only one that has lead to goals from the striker is IF A/PF A. But that was without the CM A. So some of the less successful combinations, might work if I alter the CM A

I was asking myself this question these days. I decided to move the striker to a more support/movement role because I think on a proactive 4-3-3 it is harder to use a pure goalscorer on the centre. Usually when the buildup starts he will be already around his final position and will not move so much to open space, which can cause problems when playing against a packed defence. It would be different if you were playing on the break and a running/goalscorer would be more available to run on goal from a deeper position.

[crusadertsar]

My best combination this season has been IW(a) CF(s) IW(s) with CM(a) and DLP(s) and carriloro trio in midfield. I am top 5 team however.

[CARRERA]

16 hours ago, Mr_Demus said:

Regarding the part about IF A/PF A - Last year my IF A and PF scored a lot of goals with a CM S. As soon as I changed to CM A, they stopped scoring. But a CM S gives me no penetration from the CM strata at all.

It looks decent. Might give it a go.

If you move the DLP to regular CM, what would you play in the DM position?

Well, IF/A basicly is a second striker in your formation as he not only cuts inside with the ball but also moves inside when your team is in possession (that’s a huge difference to the IW eg), so overloading the box with another player (CM/A) might not the way to go. 

Instead you need players in support to provide passing options and feeding feeding balls into central attack. 

so I would suggest switching the IF to a support duty or rebuild your central midfield with an AP and a CMs or a BBM for slightly more penetration. 

if you want to keep the CM/A you need to set up your midfield more aggressively and look for a support duty in the DM position and kinda give up some of your defensive solidity for the sake of penetration, that can be particular useful when facing very defense sides.

last but not least you may consider changing the IF to a IW/A, you also may look for another striker tho like an AF 

Edited April 12, 2021 by CARRERA

[13th Man]

16 hours ago, Mr_Demus said:

Regarding the part about IF A/PF A - Last year my IF A and PF scored a lot of goals with a CM S. As soon as I changed to CM A, they stopped scoring. But a CM S gives me no penetration from the CM strata at all.

It looks decent. Might give it a go.

If you move the DLP to regular CM, what would you play in the DM position?

Like you  and others have said, I’ve found the CM(a) to get in the way with this set up. I use the MEZ/BBM(s) (on the IF(s) side) to provide penetration. (Sometimes I’ll use a MEZ(a).) What I like about both MEZ and BBM is that they roam a bit, or go wide, into channels, and pull opponents out of position, rather than just bomb into the box (CM(a)). They often can be found on the edge of the box, either pulling a defender out to make more room for the attackers or wide open for goal scoring chances. They might no provide “penetration” themselves but they enable it.

I really like the DLP as the DM, but if it’s in the CM strata I’ll leave the DM as a standard DM, or sometimes a HB, especially if I want my wingbacks bombing forward (which I do).

I can see what people mean by having the IF(s) as a IW(s) but I like the way the IF tucks in a bit more and will attack the goal more directly when the chance is on, and combines well with the MEZ/BBM and the WB.

[Mr_Demus]

On 12/04/2021 at 01:31, 13th Man said:

Those times when things just won't work are so frustrating!

I know Experienced Defender is the main man around here and I'm just a longtime lurker coming out of hiding recently, but I have to respectfully disagree with his opposition to the IF(a) with a PF(a) in a 4-3-3.  I've had a lot of success with that set up with a style that sounds very similar to what you're looking for, as long as there's not also a CM in the same area.  I've found that the IF(a) acts kind of like a second striker and often comes in from dangerous positions and at speed (depending on the player's attributes), and the wingback provides good support on the wing.  I also personally just don't like straight wingers in a 4-3-3 unless they have a tendency to get in the on the playmaking side as well as the crossing.  It leaves the forward too isolated and while you can have some success overloading the flank with the fullback, your striker and/or IF have to be able to successfully get on the end of those crosses and will often be outnumbered.

I too like a patient build up without going full on possession heavy (my current save is super possession heavy, but that's due to the players not my preferred style!).  Especially for that, I don't like shorter passing.  Going with a mixed passing range gives your players the flexibility to choose the best option.  Just to give you an idea of a tactic I've found very successful in the 4-3-3 that you here's one I used with in fm20 and fm19 (so might need some tweaks).  It was with Southampton in the Premier League, and I used it when we were an underdog side and as we got into the CL spots.  I did start to use a CF or AF instead of a PF depending on the player and our relative quality, but the PF was effective too.  Note - this is not to hijack the thread but to give a sense of the balance/roles that I've found successful and that sound similar to what the OP is looking for.

PF(a)

IF(a)                          IF(s)

CM(s)  MEZ(s)

DLP(d)

WB(s) CB(d) CB(d) WB(s)

SK(d)

Mentality - Positive.

In Possession - Higher tempo, wide width

In transition - Distribute to CBs and WBs, distribute quickly, (sometimes, depending on opponents) counter and/or counterpress

Out of Possession - Higher defensive line, (sometimes for possession heavy sides) prevent short keeper distribution

(Roles do chance over time. I was also successful with a BBM in place of the MEZ, but you do need a runner coming up in support.  The DLP position can also be switched in the midfield strata as well.)

 

 

I have been using this setup, with a couple of alterations.

My striker scored 7 goals in 4 games, when the CM A was out of his way. The MEZ/CM//DLP combo isn't perfect though, so that might need a few changes. First, I'll try changing MEZ to BBM. Thank you for the advice. It has really worked well.

[13th Man]

15 hours ago, Mr_Demus said:

I have been using this setup, with a couple of alterations.

My striker scored 7 goals in 4 games, when the CM A was out of his way. The MEZ/CM//DLP combo isn't perfect though, so that might need a few changes. First, I'll try changing MEZ to BBM. Thank you for the advice. It has really worked well.

Glad its working out for you!  That's some fine form from the striker!

It all depends on the players as well.  Sometimes I have a good MEZ and others it's better with the BBM (or maybe even carillo?).  It's not perfect and I'm always tweaking based on the opposition and the players I have available, but I'm glad I could help you on the right track.