Overwhelmed by formation and role choices

[Leccy]

Hi 

I've started as Bochum in Bundesliga 2 and I find tactics quite overwhelming in terms of choosing a formation and roles, particularly midfield and forward roles. 

Media prediction is 5th so I feel like I should play a relatively positive brand of football.

Given I'm in the second tier I'm going to say 13 + is a good attribute and 11/12 is average.

My assistant thinks I should play 4-2-3-1 but is he right?

Goalkeeper
Has good attributes to be a sweeper keeper, but is my defense good enough for this style?

Central Defenders
The 2 best ones don't seem good enough to play out the back,but seem good defensively. But see the full backs below…
A combination of poor bravery, aggression, strength means I have no other good centre backs so this should be a 4 man defence.

Full backs
Both poor positionally, right back especially bad defensive stats. But both very good on the ball.

How do I mitigate my poor defensive fullbacks but make the most of their ability on the ball?

Central Midfielders who can defend

2 x midfielders who have the mentals and technical to defend, but nothing special on the ball – game describes them as defensive midfielders/BWM

Central Midfields who will run
1x midfielder who has ok defensive stats but also good off the ball and creative stats – game describes him as box to box

Central Midfielders who can pass but won’ t tackle

2 x AMC –excellent OTB and creatives -  poor tackling, bravery, strength, balance i.e won’t defend. Not especially good dribblers/quick runners
1 is a KEY PLAYER

Wide players

This is where I get really confused – many of my wide players could be described as playmakers as well as wingers, in that they can pass, cross, dribble. I never know whether I’m supposed to be choosing an inside forward, a winger, an advanced playmaker out wide…

Strikers

An ok poacher type

A slow creative striker that would drop off but can finish

KEY PLAYER - A fast targetman type striker strong and excellent in the air - ok finishing 

A quick advanced stiker type with ok finishing

My question is what formation do I choose? – 4-2-3-1 is the recommended.

And how do you decide the roles your wide men should play when these days wide men are generically good on the ball rather than fast dribbling/crossing wingers?

And how does this affect the role you choose for your striker? 
 

 

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, Leccy said:

Goalkeeper
Has good attributes to be a sweeper keeper, but is my defense good enough for this style?

For which style? 

 

1 hour ago, Leccy said:

Central Defenders
The 2 best ones don't seem good enough to play out the back,but seem good defensively. But see the full backs below…
A combination of poor bravery, aggression, strength means I have no other good centre backs so this should be a 4 man defence.

Full backs
Both poor positionally, right back especially bad defensive stats. But both very good on the ball

To me, this suggests a formation that deploys at least one DM, if not even two. Because your defense overall does not look strong enough to play without more direct protection in the form of a holding DM. 

 

1 hour ago, Leccy said:

Central Midfielders who can defend

2 x midfielders who have the mentals and technical to defend, but nothing special on the ball – game describes them as defensive midfielders/BWM

Central Midfields who will run
1x midfielder who has ok defensive stats but also good off the ball and creative stats – game describes him as box to box

Any player can successfully play more than one role - and most can actually play at least 3 - so you should not be obsessed with what the game recommends as one's "best" role. Instead, think about the tactical system as a whole when selecting roles and duties, because all tactical elements work through interaction (not in isolation). And look at a player's attributes when assessing which roles he could potentially play. For example, a "natural" BBM should absolutely be capable of playing as a CM on any duty or carrilero. So the optimal role of any player varies from one tactical system to another. 

 

1 hour ago, Leccy said:

My question is what formation do I choose? – 4-2-3-1 is the recommended

Do not listen to your assistant but instead follow common sense. 433 DM Wide (a.k.a. 4123 wide or 4141dm wide) is generally the most balanced formation and easiest to create a well-balanced tactic. So if you are not a tactical expert, I would suggest that you start with this system.

Keep also in mind that both good and bad tactics can be created within any formation, so the mere choice of formation means little/nothing if a tactic that you create within the formation is poorly designed.

[Leccy]

Ok if my full backs are bad positionally but I could do with someone in the AMC strata then would this 4-4-1-1 (i.e. wide players dropping back to cover defenders) seem balanced?

[Leccy]

32 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

For which style? 

 

Sorry I forgot to address this - I assumed SK would suit a play out the back style but my CBs aren't particular skilled though my FBs are

[Experienced Defender]

2 hours ago, Leccy said:

Sorry I forgot to address this - I assumed SK would suit a play out the back style but my CBs aren't particular skilled though my FBs are

SK is not about playing from the back, but rushing out to sweep up through balls from the opposition and occasionally play long-ish adventurous passes forward in an attempt to initiate a counter-attack. 

Of course, the keeper should have at least decent technical attributes if you want to build from the back, but it's not necessarily associated with the SK role. 

And if you don't want him to act/behave as a SK (rushing out & adventurous long passes), you can play him as the standard GK. Because any keeper can play as a standard GK, but only some are suited to be SKs. 

[Experienced Defender]

3 hours ago, Leccy said:

 

3 hours ago, Leccy said:

Ok if my full backs are bad positionally but I could do with someone in the AMC strata then would this 4-4-1-1 (i.e. wide players dropping back to cover defenders) seem balanced?

This setup is well-balanced in and of itself, but as I already said - given your defensively poor fullbacks, playing without a DM may prove too risky from a defensive standpoint. Plus, your CBs are technically weak as well, so having someone closer to them - i.e. the DM - could be also helpful as a passing option when needed.  

[DarJ]

For me, I start  from midfield; I'll pick one player who's creative, one how's defensive minded and a runner. Once I have my 3 midfielders or 2 depends on how many I have in the team, I'll then think about how I want them to play/interact together.

Once the midfield is settled I'll then think about how we're going to score and defend.

In your case you seem to have the players to play in midfield and since your fullbacks are bad defensively but good going forward as @Experienced Defender said, I'll go for a DM. Your key player is your striker and with the description you gave, I'll for an AF.

So you've picked roles for your defenders, midfielders and striker and you're left with your wide men; for me they will have to support the midfield and striker so maybe on the flank where I have the creative midfielder, I'll go with an Inverted winger or any other creative support role and on the other flank I may go with any other attack role that way we build play on one side and attack at the other side.

Edited April 16, 2021 by DarJ

[Leccy]

18 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

 

This setup is well-balanced in and of itself, but as I already said - given your defensively poor fullbacks, playing without a DM may prove too risky from a defensive standpoint. Plus, your CBs are technically weak as well, so having someone closer to them - i.e. the DM - could be also helpful as a passing option when needed.  

 

4 hours ago, DarJ said:

 

So you've picked roles for your defenders, midfielders and striker and you're left with your wide men; for me they will have to support the midfield and striker so maybe on the flank where I have the creative midfielder, I'll go with an Inverted winger or any other creative support role and on the other flank I may go with any other attack role that way we build play on one side and attack at the other side.

Thanks both - does something like this look well thought out?

 

[XuluBak]

Your midfield (strata) seems disproportionately aggressive relative to your formation. Exact recommendation are hard without knowing players or TI/PI, but in a vacuum...

I'd probably switch the IW to support, and make your LB more aggressive and RB less aggressive. 

[Leccy]

5 minutes ago, XuluBak said:

Your midfield (strata) seems disproportionately aggressive relative to your formation. Exact recommendation are hard without knowing players or TI/PI, but in a vacuum...

I'd probably switch the IW to support, and make your LB more aggressive and RB less aggressive. 

My thinking was how do I get support up quickly to a lone striker.

I'll screenshot my striker and 2 wide players:

[DarJ]

You can play the wide players further forward in the AML and AMR position. Your striker is not well suited to play as a DLF though, he lacks Passing, vision and decision 

Edited April 16, 2021 by DarJ

[XuluBak]

Strongly agree re: that striker. He lacks the technical ability and mentals for it. I probably wouldn't play him as anything other than an AF or TM. 

After loading Bocham up, and considering their projection, I'd recommend a more progressive formation than 4141 flat until you achieve promotion. Your backline isn't great, but probably not as limiting as you're suggesting for 2. Bundesliga. Bocham's depth is more concerning, although, it looked like they have a few mids that could drop back well enough (again, for the 2 Bundesliga level). 

Edited April 16, 2021 by XuluBak
I butchered what I was trying to say previously.

[Experienced Defender]

2 hours ago, Leccy said:

 

2 hours ago, Leccy said:

does something like this look well thought out?

Honestly, your previous setup (4411) looked better balanced in terms of roles and duties than this one, even though this formation (4141) is probably more suited to your players' qualities.

[Leccy]

50 minutes ago, XuluBak said:

Strongly agree re: that striker. He lacks the technical ability and mentals for it. I probably wouldn't play him as anything other than an AF or TM. 

After loading Bocham up, and considering their projection, I'd recommend a more progressive formation than 4141 flat until you achieve promotion. Your backline isn't great, but probably not as limiting as you're suggesting for 2. Bundesliga. Bocham's depth is more concerning, although, it looked like they have a few mids that could drop back well enough (again, for the 2 Bundesliga level). 

Apologies I should have said at the start i'm playing FM20 though you still may be correct.

How would you incorporate a TM or AF into a 4 -1-2-3 or 4-1-4-1?

32 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

 

Honestly, your previous setup (4411) looked better balanced in terms of roles and duties than this one, even though this formation (4141) is probably more suited to your players' qualities.

What changes do you suggest baring in mind the screenshots of my wide players and striker?

[XuluBak]

3 minutes ago, Leccy said:

Apologies I should have said at the start i'm playing FM20 though you still may be correct.

How would you incorporate a TM or AF into a 4 -1-2-3 or 4-1-4-1?

Ahh. Ok, I admittedly don't know how significantly their roster has changed since then, but if the projection is 5th, presumably not that drastically. I'd build a 433 (DM) much the same as I suggested previously...

AF, IW(s), W(A) up front. More aggressive FB on the IW side, more conservative FB on the W side.  There are a few good options on how to setup a midfield around that, depending on players, tactical setup, etc., but I almost never use AP in midfield, so if that's something you're wanting, I'm hesitant to provide specific advice there. However, when building a 433, I look at the FB/CM/AM on the left or right side as units and try to balance them accordingly. If the AM is cutting inside, then the FB needs to get forward to provide the width, and the CM needs to provide cover. If the AM is staying wide, then the CM (or FB, if you want to use IWB) needs to take up that space inside them, and the FB (or CM, if you IWB) needs to provide cover. To oversimplify, that means one A/S/D duty on each side, although, the "D" doesn't necessarily have to be a D it could be a more conservative "support" role. That's not a hard and fast rule, but a good starting point in my mind. As a team gets stronger, then it can afford to be more aggressive. 

 

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, Leccy said:

What changes do you suggest baring in mind the screenshots of my wide players and striker?

Something like this for example (assuming the formation remains unchanged):

TMsu

 

IWat     DLPsu    CMat     WMsu

DMde

WBsu    CDde    CDde     (I)WBsu

SKde

[Leccy]

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

Something like this for example (assuming the formation remains unchanged):

TMsu

 

IWat     DLPsu    CMat     WMsu

DMde

WBsu    CDde    CDde     (I)WBsu

SKde

The problem i have is my playmakers are all advanced, no deep players have the attributes.

So its almost like i need a formation that allows me to use role DM, AP and a TM OR AF

[XuluBak]

1 hour ago, Leccy said:

The problem i have is my playmakers are all advanced, no deep players have the attributes.

So its almost like i need a formation that allows me to use role DM, AP and a TM OR AF

Can you share your midfielders?

[Domus Clamantium]

I don't know your squad but what struck me was the question of "what should be done about full backs who are not good defensively?"

My immediate reaction is that you should play 3 centre backs, 2 wing backs and either 3 midfielders and 2 strikers or 2 midfielders and 3 strikers(2 hybrids as wide men cutting in), and of those, I'd say using the wide forwards should be more beneficial to cover the flanks better, and you end up with a sort of 3-4-3 or 5-2-3 or 5-4-1, whichever way you want to look at it.

Based on your description I'd want one of the AML/R to be an advanced playmaker and the wingback on his side to be regularly overlapping. On the opposite flank, an inside forward. The centre forward would be on attack duty to give the AP(S) or even Trequartista and IF(S) space to operate and he would be the main source of goals. I don't think a target man works in this setup though. Pressing Forward or Poacher. With 2 wide attackers plus wingbacks creating and maybe getting into the box with a high enough mentality, Poacher should work better than  you'd think.

The centre mids would be relatively conservative, one holding and one runner. Something like CM(D) and BBM(S) would work.

Edited April 17, 2021 by Domus Clamantium

[Leccy]

13 hours ago, XuluBak said:

Can you share your midfielders?

Of course

Disrupter

Runner

Playmaker

[Leccy]

7 hours ago, Domus Clamantium said:

I don't know your squad but what struck me was the question of "what should be done about full backs who are not good defensively?"

My immediate reaction is that you should play 3 centre backs, 2 wing backs and either 3 midfielders and 2 strikers or 2 midfielders and 3 strikers(2 hybrids as wide men cutting in), and of those, I'd say using the wide forwards should be more beneficial to cover the flanks better, and you end up with a sort of 3-4-3 or 5-2-3 or 5-4-1, whichever way you want to look at it.

Based on your description I'd want one of the AML/R to be an advanced playmaker and the wingback on his side to be regularly overlapping. On the opposite flank, an inside forward. The centre forward would be on attack duty to give the AP(S) or even Trequartista and IF(S) space to operate and he would be the main source of goals. I don't think a target man works in this setup though. Pressing Forward or Poacher. With 2 wide attackers plus wingbacks creating and maybe getting into the box with a high enough mentality, Poacher should work better than  you'd think.

The centre mids would be relatively conservative, one holding and one runner. Something like CM(D) and BBM(S) would work.

Perhaps i’m being harsh but my RB bravery, positioning, marking concerns me

my left back is ok but poor concentration 

 

 

[Domus Clamantium]

On 17/04/2021 at 10:22, Leccy said:

Perhaps i’m being harsh but my RB bravery, positioning, marking concerns me

my left back is ok but poor concentration 

 

 

I wouldn't worry too much. In the German leagues, defensively strong full backs are rare.

But in both cases you have players who are good as wingbacks. Generally I'd want to replace Celozzi though because he is losing his speed and 13 stamina is not enough for a wingback.

[Andros]

Sorry if this has been recommended before, or you have done so already, but @Leccy have you had a look at "Pairs and Combinations" thread?   It may guide you with some things you are asking about.  It might also start to give you some ideas to help reduce being overwhelmed in the future.  It has some ideas on how to get the full back and wide midfielder worker together, as well as midfield partnerships etc.

[engamohd]

On 15/04/2021 at 15:02, Leccy said:

Hi 

I've started as Bochum in Bundesliga 2 and I find tactics quite overwhelming in terms of choosing a formation and roles, particularly midfield and forward roles. 

Media prediction is 5th so I feel like I should play a relatively positive brand of football.

Given I'm in the second tier I'm going to say 13 + is a good attribute and 11/12 is average.

My assistant thinks I should play 4-2-3-1 but is he right?

Goalkeeper
Has good attributes to be a sweeper keeper, but is my defense good enough for this style?

Central Defenders
The 2 best ones don't seem good enough to play out the back,but seem good defensively. But see the full backs below…
A combination of poor bravery, aggression, strength means I have no other good centre backs so this should be a 4 man defence.

Full backs
Both poor positionally, right back especially bad defensive stats. But both very good on the ball.

How do I mitigate my poor defensive fullbacks but make the most of their ability on the ball?

Central Midfielders who can defend

2 x midfielders who have the mentals and technical to defend, but nothing special on the ball – game describes them as defensive midfielders/BWM

Central Midfields who will run
1x midfielder who has ok defensive stats but also good off the ball and creative stats – game describes him as box to box

Central Midfielders who can pass but won’ t tackle

2 x AMC –excellent OTB and creatives -  poor tackling, bravery, strength, balance i.e won’t defend. Not especially good dribblers/quick runners
1 is a KEY PLAYER

Wide players

This is where I get really confused – many of my wide players could be described as playmakers as well as wingers, in that they can pass, cross, dribble. I never know whether I’m supposed to be choosing an inside forward, a winger, an advanced playmaker out wide…

Strikers

An ok poacher type

A slow creative striker that would drop off but can finish

KEY PLAYER - A fast targetman type striker strong and excellent in the air - ok finishing 

A quick advanced stiker type with ok finishing

My question is what formation do I choose? – 4-2-3-1 is the recommended.

And how do you decide the roles your wide men should play when these days wide men are generically good on the ball rather than fast dribbling/crossing wingers?

And how does this affect the role you choose for your striker? 
 

 

I know it is very difficult to choose a base formation based on available player. I personally fit the players to my formation and style, unless it is fundamentally impossible. However, I will walkthrough you on how I pick a formation for an unknown team:

 

1. Defense:

a. CB Situation: Lack of CBs with sufficient quality. RESULT: Back four.

b. FB Situation: Poor defensively. RESULT: Put them in a system that protects them until you upgrade and/or train them.

 

2. Midfield:

a. CM/DM Situation: Hardworking good allrounders, that allows you to play a variety of styles.

b. AM Situation: Key creative player. RESULT: Use an AMC

c. Wide Mid/Forwards Situation:  Sounds that they are creative and not pacey. RESULT: Avoid pace-required roles/use creative wide roles

 

3. Striker Situation: Poor finishing, highly physical key target man. RESULT: Don't rely on the strikers for goals/use ST as an offensive pivot.

 

Summarizing the above, there are five points we need to address:

1. Back four

2. Naturally defensive formation

3. Use key AMC in AM position

4. Use creative wide players

5. Use supporting striker

Looking back at these requirements, we will see how we can make it fit in one formation:

1. Back four, goes without saying.

2. Naturally defensive formation: For me, that means fairly bottom heavy formation, i.e. 8 outfield players on or behind the midfield line. 4-4-2, 4-4-1-1, 4-5-1 5-3-2 etc are examples of these formations. 4-2-3-1, 4-3-3, 3-4-3, 4-2-4 and similar formations does not qualify for me. Also FB must be in the DR/DL line and wide players in the MR/ML strata. I must point that this is MY view, and not something that is set in stone. You also need to protect the FBs. This can be done in a variety of ways, but do not be afraid from playing them in the FB position.

3. Again obvious

4. Use creative wide players: This excludes the possibility of narrow formations, and make use of roles like WP and WM, rather than Wingers.

5. Use supporting striker: Your striker is quick and strong and a poor finisher. For me, this is an ideal offensive pivot. This means a role like DLF/TM/CF-S

 

Putting these together, I could come up with something like:

 

SK/GK 

FB-S - CB - CB -WB-S

WP-A - CM-S - CM-D - WM-S/A

AP-A

TM/DLF-S

This is something quite balanced, and might fit you well. Some notes:

1. The FB is intended to be the poorer FB. The wingback should be good on the ball. You may flip the entire formation to suit.

2. The CM-D provides cover to the wingback, while the *poorer* FB should remain more in line with the defense, supported by the midfield. This should mask some of your weaknesses.

3. Your best winger should be the WP-A, think Mahrez during that Leicester title winning side. The other side should basically be a wide box to box midfielder. He could be on attack duty if you find that your team offers less penetration.

4. Your best creative midfielder should be the AP-A. He will make things happen in the team.

5. Your striker is obviously the TM/DLF. The choice of roles is yours. His main job is to get things going together, and hold the ball for the rest of the team.

 

What about the style? At first sight, I would not be too specific with your team. I'd set up in a medium block, narrow def width, standard mentality, with direct passing and play out of defense as starters. Why? Narrow def width is important for defensive solidity. However if your CBs are poor in the air and have relative weakness (compared to the rest of league) in defensive positioning, then you may leave it standard.

Standard mentality is a good start point, as you generally wouldn't want to take too many risks by playing on higher mentality.

Play out of defense would give the chance to keep hold of the ball a bit more, as you are one of the better sides in the league.

Finally, direct passing to utilize your target man.

 

That way, I have come up with a blueprint that suits my preferences and players, based on your assessment of the squad. Obviously there are many other permutations possible, and it would be a nice exercise for you to conjure formation suiting your team.

Hope this helps you reaching a final conclusion that fits your team, and I am very interested in seeing your Bochum's side progress! Good luck.

Edited November 22, 2021 by engamohd