Thoughts on this LL tactic?

[trueblue9877]

Been getting some decent results once had a season with only 31 goals conceded in a 46 game season , however I only scored 35 and finished 14th.

[trueblue9877]

[Experienced Defender]

Considering the tactical style implied by in-possession TIs:

- the AP would make more sense on attack duty

- the IW on the right would make more sense on support duty

- the left midfielder would make more sense as a WM on attack than IW (unless the LCM is changed into a holding or covering role)

- not sure if the attacking duty is really necessary for the keeper (support should suffice)

- defensive TIs should definitely be made less aggressive, including better compactness (DL-LOE distance) and removal of prevent short GKD (since there are only 2 players in advanced positions)

[dactz]

I'd simplify the tactics slightly as Experienced defender said remove prevent short GKD you lack the players but also go check the analyst reports on the rest of the divisions defenders, what is their dribbling, first touch and passing? It's pretty rubbish I'd imagine you want them playing it short rather than hoofing it up the to the target man they have up front.

Not sure the BPDs is a good idea we hear the title and imagine this means they are comfortable on the ball and play shorter passes rather than just hoofing it but it actually means they try to play "Defence splitting through balls" again look at the passing and vision do they have the ability to do that consistently? 

Based on some of your instructions like run at defence, play early crosses and based on your midfielder roles it feels like you want your wingers to be the creative sparks in the team so might be worth focusing play down both the wings to force feed them the ball

[trueblue9877]

20 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Considering the tactical style implied by in-possession TIs:

- the AP would make more sense on attack duty

- the IW on the right would make more sense on support duty

- the left midfielder would make more sense as a WM on attack than IW (unless the LCM is changed into a holding or covering role)

- not sure if the attacking duty is really necessary for the keeper (support should suffice)

- defensive TIs should definitely be made less aggressive, including better compactness (DL-LOE distance) and removal of prevent short GKD (since there are only 2 players in advanced positions)

But what do you think about the structure does it look like something that looks foundationally sound?

[Experienced Defender]

14 minutes ago, trueblue9877 said:

But what do you think about the structure does it look like something that looks foundationally sound?

What exactly do you mean by "structure"? The setup of roles and duties or something else?

[trueblue9877]

13 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

What exactly do you mean by "structure"? The setup of roles and duties or something else?

What I am saying is does this look like a recipe for disaster?

[Experienced Defender]

3 hours ago, trueblue9877 said:

What I am saying is does this look like a recipe for disaster?

I would not go so far as to call it a "recipe for disaster" (for one, I've seen a lot of tactics that look much worse than yours). But it does have some obvious weaknesses that should be addressed (IMHO). And I already listed them in my first comment.