Shrewnaldo

I tend not to alter set pieces too much. I get stuck in that weird dilemma between wanting to use them effectively and then abandoning anything which feels a bit *too effective* as an exploit. The only thing I tend to change in the default set-ups is to keep some players in 'rest defence' or recovery areas - as opposed to FM's madness of having no-one between the box and the halfway line. Nice. I had some great saves with ADO back in the day. Kishna is just too good for that league. The step up in quality between the Eerste and Eredivise seems massive... not looking forward to that first season struggle. Fair point. 4-3-3 was almost ubiquitous for a while there and is still very much one of the 'go to' options IRL. I think my frustrations are more just how restrictive the match engine is so that it can avoid exploits. It's not so much the overall shape that you set the team in - it's about directing certain players to look for particular passing options, or specific rotations, or to trigger specific runs on a variety of events. Obviously this system is the only way to get such a complex sport recreated in a system that isn't easily exploited to game-breaking levels... but it's just frustrating.

So here I am to continue... Last time, I outlined how I'd settled on the standard 4-3-3 shape to get the 4-1-4-1 defensive arrangement using a high line but mid-block and drop-off instructions. Meanwhile, we're looking to break into a 2-3-5 shape with the ball by using inverted wingbacks in a short transition to support central midfield, wingers from AML/AMR to stretch the play and midfield runners to support the 9. Ideally, my idea has always been that the DM, two MCs and 9 should work as an advanced diamond, with strong connections between the four. However, so far I've been struggling to get the most vertical of the connections - from DM to 9 - consistently right. I see the DM as being the heart of the team - the primary playmaker and, opposition dependent, I'm looking for the majority of the play to go through him. Even when we have the ball in advanced positions, I want that DM to be the one looking for the ball and receiving the safe pass should advanced players get into trouble. Bringing the ball back once re-opens all sorts of passing angles for the advanced five, something like this... The 2-3-5 shape is clear and the left-winger is nicely isolated against his man. The MCL, a mezzala in this game, is looking to support him with a run in behind so it's unlikely that Giousis will look to dribble his man on the outside. Instead, he looks back to the DM, who has stepped out into midfield in plenty of space because the midfield runners have dragged the opponent's midfield back with them. Once the DM gets it, he'll have four potential passing options - possibly give if the aforementioned mezzala makes himself available. That, to me, is the perfect set-up in midfield and so I'm absolutely settled on a regista at DM. Ordinarily I'd be concerned that such an aggressive role as the lone DM would leave us exposed, but that's the beauty of the inverted wingbacks who, as you can see in the screenshot above, have come inside to the typical DM positions and are protecting us against the counter. Pleasingly, the IWBs also occasionally take the opportunity to break beyond the midfield but those instances have, to date, been during counters or when the regista is relatively deep. This despite my prior whinges about players not appropriately considering the positioning of their team-mates when making decisions... You can also see how using wingers on both flanks help stretch the play and prevents the opposition defence from retreating into a narrow, low block. We're already looking to move around the defensive line on the left and have the winger on the right holding the width on the far side. If the defence doesn't keep its width, then something like this happens and we get free men available for the switch. As you can probably tell from the description so far, I'm 90% happy with the way the tactic plays but there are consistent issues. Every tactic will struggle against certain systems and this is no different. For example, if we play against the now-popular 3-4-2-1 with two AMs, then the oppositions two 10s can swamp our regista and cut off the passing lanes to the IWBs which is such an important part of his ability to retain the ball. In those instances, I switch the regista to a ball-winner, go wide and attack the flanks. So we adapt. Fine. But some aspects I have been unable to, as yet, find successful adaptations. The primary issue being the lack of a runner in-behind. The over-arching strategy of this approach is to pull the opposition forward and out of position, then play through them quickly. By using our primary playmaker at DM, and retaining passing options at every angle from him, I want the opponent chasing the ball as much as possible - first pushing up to try and close down the regista and IWBs, then chasing back with the midfield runners. On both occasions, the idea is to move the space to somewhere more dangerous by forcing the defenders occupying that space to move somewhere they don't want to go. Typically, I'd employ a striker who would drop off the line and continue this theme up top - looking to force the defensive line to collapse inwards by dragging a centre back up the pitch and creating space in behind him. But to date, I haven't had a great deal of luck consistently having the midfield runners break beyond the 9 to exploit that space. Obviously SI has nerfed the CM(A) but I think the trouble might also be down to personnel - whilst my options for CM are good on the ball, none of them have the sort of pace they'll probably need to represent a threat in behind. Also my 9s aren't the most creative players in the world, so whilst I look to rectify those problems, I've simply reverted to using the 9 to get in behind himself. Using this. And, to be honest, I can't really complain because we're smashing it. We won the first period to give us a guaranteed play-off spot and currently top the table on goal difference. Which is, you know, handy. And despite being used in what I consider to be a sub-optimal role for the system, our strikers have been performing admirably with Rein Smit providing 0.73 goals per 90, and Koen Blommestijn 0.67 - both with 6 total. So perhaps I'm wrong and we should simply stick with FM's favourite striker role going forward - the AF. For the long-term, my preference is still to find a creative striker to come in as a false 9 to get that vertical axis going with the regista and, hopefully, bring in the central runners - who have scored at around 0.2 goals per 90 each - into play more effectively. For now though, I won't fix what isn't broken.

Ah, stats in FM. Got to love it. If only they worked in the analysis screens then we could just go check for ourselves. Form is really picking up. Is it mad to say you might be in with a shout of playoffs? Not that far off

Cracking January that - seems you just have momentum now and there should be no looking back once you've picked up results like that. It's interesting how similar our primary systems are getting - there are a couple of small but significant changes with mine but the principles all look the same. Which I guess should be unsurprising

I like that idea, but at the moment we're suffering because when the ball goes wide the central defenders don't track back properly. Example below - here the play has developed slowly but instead of dropping back to be, at worst, in line with the left-back they have held a higher line allowing the striker to get goalside and have a free shot. Thankfully offside in this case but this sort of stuff happens far too often and, in my opinion, is a symptom of both shocking positioning from the left-back and failure of the centre backs to react properly to the play around them. So at the moment, I'm trying to restrict the opposition to mostly ranged shots through the middle and only funneling wide when they're playing 5-3-2 or something similar with only one player on each flank. Progress but not yet at the target yet: So far I have to say that I'm enormously pleased with Breukers but van Arnhem has been a little underwhelming so far. But a 50% success ratio, in the short-term, for low-value, low-risk signings is pretty decent in my view. What I'd like to work out is a 'conversion factor' to apply to the amateur stats to try and make them comparable to Eerste Divisie output. Last year, I applied a 5% factor for signings from Ligue 1 into the Premier League and I need to work out what that would be not just for these domestic transfers but also, for example, bringing someone in from the Finnish league. Properly nerdy stuff, but great fun.

Season 2 Preparation Conscious that I still need to finish my thoughts regarding the tactic, but I'm at the start of the 2023-24 season and wanted to use this post to help my decision-making - specifically on a unique approach to my scouting conundrum. First though, following complaints from fans, Naldo Spitsmuis has had his first pitch-side fashion upgrade. I had planned from the start to update every season as we go through, but don't feel like we've progressed far enough yet to justify any of the smarter outfits. Hopefully with time... The board did furnish me with £257k, not to upgrade my wardrobe but to bring in new players but we have, as yet, refused to spend any of it. Instead, we've prioritised free transfers and a few loans from parent club Feyenoord. I'd covered Blommestijn and Breukers above, whilst van Arnhem's deal is similar to the latter - a minor gamble bringing in a player from the Dutch amateur leagues when I can't be certain of the veracity of the statistics on offer. Similar to the striker, van Arnhem came with some glowing reports from our meagre scouting contingent and some promising stats. In particular, his 0,33 assists per 90 caught my eye, 13 in 41 starts. And on a free transfer, with much lower wages than the outgoing Helmer, he also represented a low-risk approach. Which is exactly what we also got with the three loanees. Candelaria will come in primarily as the left inverted wingback but able to cover at centre back. Playing for Feyenoord's reserves last season, his passing from the back was exceptional - rarely giving the ball away and with a very handy 5.29 progressive passes per 90. He's also 6'4" and provides additional aerial prowess for set pieces at both ends. Guus Baars is very much a bog-standard centre back with relatively modest passing statistics but really impressive defensive output including tackles and headers per 90 that exceeded even my high-performing centre backs. Finally, we needed a little bit of midfield flair and I went with an old approach - bringing a winger into the centre as a midfield runner. Chabrol-Touré is really an AML but his dribbling ability through the middle, coupled with his excellent passing ability (for this level), should make him the ideal CM(A) to complete our first-choice midfield three. This leaves us with the following strengthened squad and sufficient depth across the board to cope with all but the worst of injury crises. The one position where I was tempted to invest some of the transfer kitty was up front. Blommestijn is good but inconsistent, Smit is still developing and Breukers is a bit of an unknown having been brought in from amateur football. But I couldn't find an option who combined the physicality and creativity that I was looking for, so in the end I've opted to keep with what we have and instead do something completely different with the transfer funds. As it stands, the board provided a £27.5k scouting budget. The only package we can then afford covers only the 'Netherlands' and my recruitment options are severely limited. Because of our relatively low reputation, there aren't many players from the top two tiers who want to join us - so I'm left with either taking a gamble on the uncertain statistics from amateur football, or trying to find a gem in the dregs that everyone else has jettisoned. So instead I'm going to do something I've never done before and transfer my wage budget into the scouting budget. This will give me a £276k scouting budget and allow me to improve our scouting range to 'Europe'. Even if I do this for just one season, I can get my scouts out around the lower reputation leagues gathering knowledge about as many players as possible - which I can then feed into my statistical views and, come the end of the year, bring in the 3 or 4 players I think we'll need to take that extra step towards promotion. And once we're promoted, we should naturally extend our scouting range anyway. The only gamble is the obvious one that I need those transfer funds - but having trimmed the squad to a total of 30 players and allowed the high earners like Plet and Helmer to leave, our wage outlay is a mere 50% of the £26k per week allowed. So worst case scenario - I just re-assign some of that wage budget into the transfer budget and bring in an emergency signing. This all makes a lot of sense to me and I think represents a pretty minimal gamble. Given the game style, I need scouting knowledge more than anything right now. The board need us to finish mid-table only and I'm extremely confident that we'll meet that target comfortably with the squad at my disposal. Playoffs are my aim - preferably through winning one of the stages. Playoffs and a couple of statistical targets. Some time ago I came across this graph on twitter and it piqued an interest, largely because I was pleased to see how closely it managed my experience from FM. As opposed to a series of other statistics, it would appear that FM matches real life in capturing the quality of an average shot. As opposed to just relying on xG for and against, understanding the average xG per shot taken and faced can give you a broader understanding of whether your tactics or your personnel are failing. And so my statistical targets are to have an average xG per shot of >0.11 and restrict our opposition to an average of <0.08. Last season, we had an average xG/shot of 0.118 and faced an average xG/shot of 0.113. So clear work to do on the defensive side of the game despite ending up with the second best defence in the league. How I plan to do that and the completion of the errant tactical post to follow in due course...

Yeah pretty much settled on the 4-3-3 and I'll just have to assuage my desire for expermentation with some game-to-game tweaks and in-match reactivity. I guess sticking to a consistent-ish system will help with building the statistical profiles that I need. That's one thing I think the current FM tactics system is particularly bad at representing - fluidity within systems. I gave the example of a midfield pairing where, when you're attacking, you'd want one to go with the attack and one to stay and protect. But you don't always want it being the same one who goes. In real football, a player would look at his midfield partner and decide whether or not to go based on the other's positioning. That doesn't seem to be possible in FM. Maybe it's just that I'm only ever seeing examples where it goes wrong (which does happen IRL) but players don't seem to incorporate that sort of flexibility.

58 points?! That's mad. Are you still able to get free loans? That might be just about the only thing that'll save you with that transfer budget.

Aye, could do. And all affected by the team mentality, opposition positioning etc etc Certainly worth experimenting with. I had a play about for a few games with a 4-1-4-1 but the central two at AMC, and they definitely played closer to the 9 (as you'd expect) but left unacceptable gaps in defence. So definitely easier to get the MCs further forward, than to get AMCs to defend properly

Yeah I wondered if using a regista, on support obvs, would counteract that new positioning - not sure if the game looks at the roles, the actual on-field positioning or a combination of the two. I would hope it's not just the role selection. What you're saying is counterintuitive to me - I'd have thought the MCs would have less license to get forward if the DM was also pushing on. I'd have liked some thought about cover, rather than just an endless concertina of everyone getting pushed further forward... Going to replay some old matches, see if I'm just missing something

How much have you actually been seeing a change in 23? Heard this a few times but, using a mezz(S) and CM(A) in front of a regista, I can't say that I've noticed much, if any, difference from 22. So far, it's only been in the other direction, with the regista staying a bit deeper - although I think that might be down to player traits

Interesting positioning there. I'm assuming the player sitting just in front of them is a DM? Or is that an MC with a defend duty? Appreciate that the game is trying to incorporate positioning mistakes but surprised that they are sitting so narrow here if the third player is indeed a DM that hasn't really stepped up into midfield.

Sorry, I'm not really familiar with Ten Haag's Ajax, did they play with inverted wingbacks? Yeah, really pleased with the defensive performance and you rightly point out that we've got a solid core that I'm looking to keep. I love to build from the back so this gives me a bit of hope that I just need add a bit of sparkle. Don't think we're far off really. Agreed. I like that they seem to walk the talk, and I've had some great interactions with the fan base on twitter which has really helped me get into the save

Aye, the DM(D) totally makes sense to me - provide that double pivot in front of the centre backs and, like you say, keep the DCs narrow By the way, I think you added the release clause info to the wrong paragraph :-)

First Season Round-Up I'll come back to the tactical wittering shortly but I've just finished season 1 (2022/23) so thought it was an apt time to wrap-up. Headline story is that we were no great shakes in the cup, beating lower league AFC then losing to Eredivisie regulars Groningen; but we had a pretty successful campaign in the league. Predicted to finish 19th, we meandered through the four periods as a solid mid-table side. Our worst performance came in period 3 with just 9 points, but we recovered so well with 20 points in period 4 that we snuck into the final playoff spot available from the 38-game table. Sadly, our flirtation with promotion wouldn't last long as we went out to NAC Breda across two legs. Yet even that experience was encouraging as, following a 0-0 bore draw in the home leg, we out xG'd the third-placed side in the return game only for our 'keeper to have a shocker and cost us in a 5-2 loss. Which leaves us planning for next season and what I hope will be our first genuine push towards a realistic promotion campaign. Which takes me onto what I find the most interesting aspect of FM these days - recruitment season. Over the course of the year, I've secured the players that I definitely want to keep, meaning we have 18 players out of contract come 30th June. Of those 18, there are 3 that I am considering trying to keep - midfielders Tom Overtoom and Anass Najah, and left-back Delvechio Blackson. That decision will likely depend on whether I can find alternatives on cheaper deals before their deals expire. The three of them represent nearly 6000 minutes of game-time this season but I've been less then convinced they should be offering anything other than squad depth for a team pushing at the top half of the table. One other player I need to decide on is my first signing at Telstar, Jeremy Helmer. With the first transfer window disabled, I was only able to bring Helmer in once some money was generated through the £20k sale of Mihkel Ainsalu to Flora Talinn, of DanGear fame. That £20k was pumped straight into my wage budget but, with no stats to go on for a free transfer, I insisted on a short-term contract only for Helmer, but an option for the club to extend by a year. And whilst he's been good, his metrics just don't match up to our other midfield options and his £1700/week contract will go un-renewed. Two players I will bring in are Koen Blommestijn having done enough during his loan spell that I've resigned him as a rotation option; and Bas Breukers joining from amateur side Groene Star on the strength of some excellent scouting reports. The latter is a bit of a test, With the Dutch amateur leagues being an inactive division, I have no real idea how Breukers' stats will stand up once he starts playing "real games". He looks to have the basic attributes to be able to play across the front line, with some work on his strength needed, and his 0.56 goals per 90 with a 58% shots on target ratio is very decent for a young player. This transfer should give me an early indication as to how those stats will compare to Eerste Divisie players and if delving into the lower leagues is a viable option. So what else do I need? Well basically quality everywhere would be nice but mostly we just need numbers. I'm trying to force myself to use the Squad Planner so this should indicate the issue: Midfield is a clear problem (hence the decision re Overtoom and Najah), whilst we need depth across the entire pitch really. The youth intake provided a couple of options which I think can be bench-filler and our new link with Feyenoord should be able to provide 3-5 really good options but I'm anticipating a pretty busy summer recruitment period. And with the recruitment focus system having proven absolutely and utterly useless for me so far, it's going to be a lot of manual scouting using the aforementioned Player Search filters and some statistical lenses. Which, to be honest, suits me just fine. I really do enjoy that side of the game more than anything else these days. So time to get started I guess

Using 2 AMCs instead of MCs is one of the options I'll come onto. For me it works much better on the ball by encouraging those 8/10s to play so much closer to the 9, but the defensive gaps are just too much to accept as a trade off. Re pivots - not a huge amount of change although I'm playing with a regista who I want to push up anyway. So far, I've found him less adventurous than 22 but that could be down to traits Which part did you struggle with last year?

Some tactical thoughts / whinging In some of the previous posts, I've done my usual whining about wanting to be able to do something a bit different tactically, without having any actual idea of what I want to do and simultaneously rejecting anything which might really be different because it looks a bit funny on the tactics screen. Over the course of the last few games, I've just settled on the inevitable acceptance that the match engine is what it is, and I should just build the same old system trying to replicate the sort of football that I like watching. And in doing so, I've run into the same problems that I always do - so I thought I'd just write them down and try to work through which of the imperfect options to impose going forward. Essentially, I want to play a system which defends as a 4-1-4-1 but attacks as a 2-3-5, something like what I outlined a long, long time ago here which evolved into this. In my old thought process, I'd wanted to play something like a 3-3-4 in attack but over time I've been happier to push an extra player forward into a more modern front 5. It's a well-known truth in the FM world that the positioning you see on the tactics pitch is only how your players should line up once you are established in the defensive phase. From transition into attack and back again, the typical shape will vary. Therefore, it's a very simple thing to decide that the tactics screen should look something like this if you want to defend in a 4-1-4-1 (ignore the roles, I've just loaded the default shapes). So far, so good. The game then allows you to select your preferred means of defending - perhaps being more passive in a low-block and lower line, or trying to be more pro-active in a high press and high line to force the opposition into early mistakes. I don't really have any particular, inherent preference for either and I tend to figure out what I think works best for each match engine. At the moment, I'm going with a higher line but mid-block to keep a compact shape, whilst asking my defensive line to Drop off more to mitigate against the lack of pace I have at the back. All very straightforward. On to the more interesting part, perhaps - what to do when we get the ball. To go from a 4-1-4-1 defensive shape into a 2-3-5 attacking shape, we have a whole host of options. The most typical modern way to achieve this would be for the wingers to come inside and support the 9, whilst the wingbacks overlap to provide the width so that you end up with something like this: Again, very straightforward and oh so very boring. My idea back in 2014 (before Pep did it, I'll have you know), was to shorten the transition distances by having the fullbacks come inside to act as auxiliary midfielders and keeping the wide players on the flanks thereby allowing the two central midfielders to provide the central thrust and support to the 9. So instead you get something like this: It's the same shape and it has its advantages and disadvantages but it's just a system that I like to use. You could even run a hybrid of the two - on the right-flank, you have the fullback come inside to form the midfield line, whilst on the left, the wingback overlaps an inside forward and the midfielder holds his position. All sorts of options. The hybrid gives you some benefits in having an additional player to transition through - as the wingback, Blackson in the screenshot below, will hold his deep position longer whilst play is being developed from the back and can provide a wide link from defence to attack. The corollary, of course, is that you have one fewer player in forward positions if you transition very quickly. In the screenshot below, Mulder is playing as a CM(A) and indicates how an additional midfield runner would be ~20 yards higher up the pitch than the attacking wingback. Conversely, the holding midfielder will tend to sit higher when you have established possession in the final third, compared to an IWB (notwithstanding duties and propensity for forward runs). I'm not saying one is better than the other - just options. To be continued... got distracted by real life duties and don't want to lose the half-completed post.

Decent. I do enjoy stuff like this - the same problem but different, entirely logical ways of trying to counteract it, neither of which is right or wrong.

With the 4-4-1-1, my experience of flat 4s in defence and midfield is that the 2 MCs will inevitably drop and compress the space in front of the defence - unless you've got some other instructions which supercede that. So they end up protecting "zone 14" pretty well, albeit subject to their wandering tendencies during transition from attack to defence. Have you been finding something different this year? I wonder if a 4-2-3-1 with 3 narrow AMCs would counteract the DMs / MCs propensity for pushing up, as the game sees that the area is already occupied by attacking players? The usual problem with 3AMCs is how to get the wide ones to defend the flanks, but this was actually quite a pleasing change when I tried two AMCs behind a 9 in a 3-4-3(ish) - they really did drop in wide and deep when defending. It was actually a little frustrating in the other direction when I wanted to keep them high in support of the 9 but it proved impossible to do so.

sorry to go back a bit but this was interesting to me so wanted to get your view. If the opposition had only two players out wide and eight players through the middle then my initial reaction would be to trap them outside, rather than inside. My thinking is that pushing them into the middle plays to their strengths where you are overloaded. If you have a 2v1 on the flanks, I'd look to trap outside and then press their wingbacks where you have an overload. I appreciate that there's an opposite justification, but just keen to get your view on why you pressed inside - very happy to accept that I could be wrong. Almost worked for you, after all.

We've set up a new affiliate deal with one of the Netherlands' giants. The board gave me the option between Utrecht and Feyenoord. The decision was actually a little more difficult than you'd think because Utrecht offered a fee alongside the deal, but at the end of the day a couple of seasons' access to free loan deals for the Feyenoord youth is just too good to turn down. How are you finding the new recruitment focuses, Ben? They just don't seem to work quite right to me

Seems like there's quite a few parallels between our games. I had this issue with my early attempts to play a direct counter-attacking game. Playing a target forward, I thought we'd play up to the strong striker who would look to hold it up and bring others into play. Instead, the ball is inevitably floated up so that he has an aerial challenge with a defender and, even if he wins it, he has to try and head it to a team-mate. There's no hint of taking the ball in, holding off a defender and keeping the ball for 2-3 seconds whilst others come into the game. Very frustrating. With the 4-2-3-1 and using two DMs on support - I've found that they get too aggressive when you have established possession and I would literally watch both push up as the opposition was breaking out with the ball. It's really frustrating that there doesn't seem to be any intelligence in the player, or ability to instruct the team, for a midfield pairing to play as a pair - noting that if one goes, then the other doesn't; but it isn't always the same one which goes. That just doesn't seem possible in FM either. Sorry, not meaning to derail your thread with whinges about the game. Are you settling back into the 4-1-4-1 going forward?

Recruitment changes I quite like the intent of the recruitment changes for FM23 but I really feel like SI don't have it set right. Every time I set a recruitment focus, it seems to be completed insanely quickly - within a week or two - and almost inevitably without finding a single suitable player. I've tried making the focus very broad or very narrow with no seeming difference. And where I've tried to use 'ongoing' focuses, all that happens is that the same raft of players are listed in the 'ongoing' tabs, with absolutely no-one making it to the 'recommendations' or 'near misses'. Some of this might be down to my poor scouting team, or the club's low reputation and players of the required quality simply being unwilling to join. Regardless, it's left me with a dearth of options going into the second half of the season when I'd like to be honing targets and starting to speak to agents. So instead, I've decided to change from my original intention and use the Player Search screen, but in a specific way. I've unchecked the "Interested in" filter as what I feel is the most unrealistic aspect of this screen. Next, I'll essentially try to use it as a statistical database that real life managers or recruitment departments will be able to access. Using a custom view specific to the position, or the output that I'm looking for, I can then manually send the scouts to go and provide a report, or watch a handful of games. To keep it as realistic as possible, I'm going to limit the search to players within leagues that are covered by my scouting package - so at the moment that will be domestic leagues only. Expanding that scouting range is going to be a priority pretty quickly. It's clear that we need to bring in some quality if we're to meet our inital target of promotion by 2026. The third period didn't go that well, with just two wins and three draws. Goal scoring was clearly the issue in this period as all three of our striking options went through simultaneous droughts - none of them scoring between 18th November and 10th March in the league which is, you know, not ideal. The fault for some of that may lie with me, however, given the constant tactical meanderings which robs the team from any sort of consistency. The overall table still has us in 11th, which is much better than our pre-season prediction of 19th and, with our fourth period matches being against mostly lower half sides, an outside shot at an unlikely playoff spot.

I have no idea how you manage to play so quickly and provide such detailed updates. Great stuff. Have to say that I was very surprised that you resigned from Mememenememenemeispor but has clearly turned out to be a smart move. I think I'm right in saying that there aren't many, or any?, big clubs in Ankara - bit off for a capital city I guess. Definite scope to become a regionally dominant club in a populous area - which can only help your drive for youth recruitment.

Yeah the squad is pretty well covered - perhaps not in any sort of quality but then there isn't really any quality at all. So trying the different systems let me try out a whole bunch of different players in different roles - and because I can't see the numerical attributes that's very useful. The only area where this has been a bit more difficult is at centre back - there are lots of options but some of them are not exactly reliable, so finding three starters is problematic. That's even better than the usual Scotland / Ireland winners that only ever happens in FM. Ghana went out in the groups on mine - good group that with Portugal, Uruguay and South Korea. You'll probably remember that I played that with Bristol City until the last season when I, shock horror, switched to 4-3-3 and finished second. Not keen on anything too narrow here though - our most effective players have been Giousis from the left wing and Liesdek from the right. The former could play as a 10, and the latter as the right wing-back - but neither as effectively. I thought the 5-3-2 varieties would give me a glimpse at a similar narrow attacking system. And as usual, this is part of the problem (clearly my problem and not the game's) - I don't really know what I want. I just want to do something different. Bit bored of the same old, same old. That 1-star rating is their ability as a trequartista. We have a couple who are really decent wingers and Liesdek has been particularly effective, leading my assist charts.