How does this tactic look? Any recommendations?

[USMNT]

I can provide a more detailed view later along with screen shots of results but I am sitting here at work and thought I can be productive by posting this and maybe receiving some constructive criticism. I am getting great results with this but it can still use some work. One thing that stands out to me is that the difference between shots and shots on goal is pretty large, but then when I look at the analysis after matches, all the shots are pretty much withing the box, not really much, if any at all, long shots.

GK - gk defend
DR - wing back (a)
DCR - limited defender (s)
DCL - bpd (d)
DL - full back (a)
MR - wide playmaker (a)
MCR - central mid (d)
MCL - rpm (s)
ML - winger (a)
STR - complete fwd (s)
STL - advance fwd (a)

Mentality: Control
Team shape: Flexible

Tempo: Higher
Time wasting: Fairly rarely

Defensive line: Slightly Higher (Use offside trap)
Closing Down: More (Prevent short GK distribution)

Build up: Play out of defense

Passing directness: mixed

Dribbling: Run at defense


That is everything. Anything I didn't mention in the above means it is not selected. I know it would be so much easier and simpler to look at a screen shot of the formation and instructions but like i said, I am at work right now and it will be a while until I get home. When I do get home, I will post SS if need be.

So, does anything stand out to you? What is causing the high number of shots vs low number of shots on goal? I still get a good amount of shots on goal, but it is significantly smaller than total shots.

Thanks!

 

[kandersson]

Lower number of shots on target could be due to using a higher tempo (and 'control' is already a pretty attacking, high tempo mentality) together with 5 players on attacking duty. Probably your players tend to rush things a bit, pushing defense and shooting when they feel a chance. I'd imagine you have lots of shots blocked by defenders for this reason. It happens to me a lot, it is somewhat expected when you play an attacking style, as you're trying to press your opponents and rely on quantity of chances rather than quality.

A more conservative style (lower mentality, less attacking duties) would result in less chances, but probably more shots on target.

 

[USMNT]

Lower number of shots on target could be due to using a higher tempo (and 'control' is already a pretty attacking, high tempo mentality) together with 5 players on attacking duty. Probably your players tend to rush things a bit, pushing defense and shooting when they feel a chance. I'd imagine you have lots of shots blocked by defenders for this reason. It happens to me a lot, it is somewhat expected when you play an attacking style, as you're trying to press your opponents and rely on quantity of chances rather than quality.

A more conservative style (lower mentality, less attacking duties) would result in less chances, but probably more shots on target.

Thanks!

So what do you think is better? Quantity or quality? Right now this tactic is in the quantity category but it is getting great results. Was just trying to figure a way to close the gap between Shots and SOG. Is it better to have as many chances as possible regardless if a handful of them result in shots off target? Or is it better to limit your total shots significantly and only take quality shots? For example, a bomber jet...is it best to drop a few bombs precisely aiming at the target or drop a barrage of shots, with some obviously missing targets, but a handful are guaranteed to hit the target (goal)?

Thinking maybe I should stick with the tactic the way it is and accept that there is going to be a large gap between shots and shots on target rather than slowing everything down and significantly decreasing my chances just so the Shots vs SOG are more "Efficient"

 

[WJ]

Quality is ALWAYS better. I'm surprised at the question, tbh. What's the point of having 20 soft shots if you could have 2 great chances?

 

[USMNT]

Quality is ALWAYS better. I'm surprised at the question, tbh. What's the point of having 20 soft shots if you could have 2 great chances?

Not ALWAYS. I am surprised that you are surprised. What is the point of having 20 shots? The point of that many shots is the hope that some of them go in. The more shots/opportunities to take, the less efficient you have to be. Whereas if you only get 5 shots off during the match, you absolutely have to make them count. There is no room for error. But with 20 shots, there is more room for missed chances.

Plus, I am not saying that I don't get a lot of shots on goal. I am just trying the find a way to close the gap between shots on goal and shots taken. My matches get about 30 shots and like 15 shots on goal and averaged about 3 or 4 goals a game.

 

[kandersson]

Thanks!

So what do you think is better? Quantity or quality? Right now this tactic is in the quantity category but it is getting great results. Was just trying to figure a way to close the gap between Shots and SOG. Is it better to have as many chances as possible regardless if a handful of them result in shots off target? Or is it better to limit your total shots significantly and only take quality shots? For example, a bomber jet...is it best to drop a few bombs precisely aiming at the target or drop a barrage of shots, with some obviously missing targets, but a handful are guaranteed to hit the target (goal)?

Thinking maybe I should stick with the tactic the way it is and accept that there is going to be a large gap between shots and shots on target rather than slowing everything down and significantly decreasing my chances just so the Shots vs SOG are more "Efficient"

Ideally you could find a balance. It's a trade-off, you trade a higher number of total shots for a higher percentage of shots on target. In your set-up, I'd probably remove the higher tempo instruction, and try balancing duties of wide players (I'm thinking WP/s on the right and FB/s on the left, so you have some diversity on the flanks while retaining width with attacking right back and left winger). This could help creating more reasoned chances, but could also limit the power of your wide play, which I suspect is a big strength of your tactic.

'Efficiency' is so hard to measure in football. Irl I think I've read that more total shots (including shots off target) statistically lead to more goals, I think it was Arsene Wenger who stressed this recently, and that's why he encourages his players to take long shots. But again, you can't really apply 'moneyball' to football imho. In FM, I generally try to find a balance between what I like and what works in the game, that's my main suggestion about your tactic

EDIT: 50% of shots on target is actually a pretty high percentage, now I'd say don't change anything!

 

[WJ]

Not ALWAYS. I am surprised that you are surprised. What is the point of having 20 shots? The point of that many shots is the hope that some of them go in. The more shots/opportunities to take, the less efficient you have to be. Whereas if you only get 5 shots off during the match, you absolutely have to make them count. There is no room for error. But with 20 shots, there is more room for missed chances.

Plus, I am not saying that I don't get a lot of shots on goal. I am just trying the find a way to close the gap between shots on goal and shots taken. My matches get about 30 shots and like 15 shots on goal and averaged about 3 or 4 goals a game.

Your logic is off. Quality is always better than quantity. If you can generate quantity and quality, then even better, but it's rare. There's a balance to be had, obviously. It's no good trying to create a quality shot, only for it never to happen and you didn't even get a shot off the entire match.

The aim though, is (should be) to create quality shots, however that is possible.

If you have 30 shots, 15 on target and 3-4 goals regularly, then you are producing quality and quantity. Your OP says different though?

 

[USMNT]

Your logic is off. Quality is always better than quantity. If you can generate quantity and quality, then even better, but it's rare. There's a balance to be had, obviously. It's no good trying to create a quality shot, only for it never to happen and you didn't even get a shot off the entire match.

The aim though, is (should be) to create quality shots, however that is possible.

If you have 30 shots, 15 on target and 3-4 goals regularly, then you are producing quality and quantity. Your OP says different though?

I am not denying quality and quantity are both good but both rare. Most of the time it is going to be one or the other. But, I don't think my logic is off at all. Just a different approach. Having your squad take a lot of shots rather than holding onto the ball even longer isn't the definition of logic being off. Just a different approach. I agree, shooting too soon rather than looking for a better opportunity is not a good thing, but the more shots you take, the more opportunities it creates.

Yes, I guess you can say 30 shots, 15 on target, 3-4 goals a match is quality AND quantity. But I am looking at it different. I am looking at it as what happened with those 15 shots off target? Of course maybe some of those shots on target were created from the rebound of some of the shots off target. But, the way I am looking at this is why did I have 15 shots off target? What happened? What can I do to decrease that by not decreasing my total shots? What can I do to make it 30/20 rather than 30/15? Or, what can I do to make it 25/20 rather than 30/15? That's what I am talking about in this OP and why I created this thread.

 

[WJ]

We can't see the match, so it would be impossible to say without viewing the PKM. Have you looked?

Your tactic is very attacking, both mentality wise and duty wise and you increased tempo. Any or all 3 could be the reason. Have a look at the shots off target.

 

[USMNT]

We can't see the match, so it would be impossible to say without viewing the PKM. Have you looked?

Your tactic is very attacking, both mentality wise and duty wise and you increased tempo. Any or all 3 could be the reason. Have a look at the shots off target.

Thanks, I am the worst at dissecting a tactic through the post game results. What should I look for? Like, if this happens, then it means this, and I should do this to the tactic.

I will try to get some results up on here later today when I get home.

 

[WJ]

It's best to first find what the issue is. Try to spot patterns as well.

 

[USMNT]

It's best to first find what the issue is.

And that is what I struggle at finding lol. I suck at both finding an issue and adjusting. Missed shots are part of the game. Not all of them are an issue. But some of the missed shots are, but I struggle and determining that. And then I struggle at what causes it.

 

[WJ]

And that is what I struggle at finding lol. I suck at both finding an issue and adjusting. Missed shots are part of the game. Not all of them are an issue. But some of the missed shots are, but I struggle and determining that. And then I struggle at what causes it.

You're right, some missed shots are just that. Nothing you can do about it. Seems like you're doing well enough though and 50% is acceptable, even if you are taking a lot of shots.

 

[USMNT]

View attachment 189333View attachment 189332View attachment 189331View attachment 189330View attachment 189329View attachment 189328View attachment 189327

Here are some screen shots.

 

[USMNT]

You're right, some missed shots are just that. Nothing you can do about it. Seems like you're doing well enough though and 50% is acceptable, even if you are taking a lot of shots.

So, with those screen shots, what do you see? What should I be looking at?

 

[WJ]

So, with those screen shots, what do you see? What should I be looking at?

I don't see anything. As I said, you should be watching the match itself. Watch the shots.

 

[USMNT]

I don't see anything. As I said, you should be watching the match itself. Watch the shots.

I did lol. In my eyes, they are just shots lol. I posted the screen shots of where they came from and such.

38 shots. 23 on target and only 1 goal lol.

Goal: 1
Missed Target: 10
Saved: 22
Woodwork: 1
Blocked: 4

 

[Bigpapa42]

Screenshots can still only give us so much. The show the shot angle but not the specific context. That's where watching the match is key. What looks like a great chance from the middle of the box from looking at the analysis may have actually been a really narrow shooting window between two defenders and it went right to the GK for a super easy save.

The numbers here are quite odd. 22 saves means either they were good quality shots but the goalkeeper had a blinder of a match, or they just weren't good scoring opportunities. The lack of CCCs (although the number is misleading at times) makes me think its the latter. With bad opportunities, its odd to get so many on goal, but that could down to the players.

As WJ pointed out, you are very attacking. You also have a very high reputation. This could be - and I'm guessing - a case of a team parking the bus. You are pushing them back and they are defending deep, in numbers. Your attackers have no space to carve out good opportunities. so they take narrow shooting windows and the keeper is well positioned. Boom, easy save. Now, this happening more typically results in a lower shot on target rate, as more go astray and get blocked. This is where watching the individual shots tells you more than analyzing the stats does.

I do agree with WJ - the quality of the chance matters. Remember that there are a lot of elements in play, including the players themselves. What happens when a player gets 4 or 5 chances in a half and doesn't score? It depends on the personality, but a lot of players will get frustrated. A frustrated or even angry player is rarely more effective than a composed and professional one. And what happens for the opposition? They gain confidence from being under pressure and succeeding, so they play better and remain composed. It builds throughout a match. FMers often complain about getting beaten when they had 25 shots and the opposition had 2. But the quality of the opportunity is at play there in most cases. A beautiful counter when you are wide open is a great opportunity and often all the opposition needs.

Like kandersson says, this may be a byproduct of being too attacking. But it may also be a one-off. Looking at trends over more matches and actually looking at the events will tell you more.

 

[USMNT]

When you say too attacking, would it be due to the tempo, or the player roles? Move the wingers to support?

 

[Bigpapa42]

When you say too attacking, would it be due to the tempo, or the player roles? Move the wingers to support?

To start with... change nothing....

I do agree with kanderson that it seems to be working. How often are you seeing matches like the screenshots above? Is it happening often or is an occasional thing and more often you are getting 3-4 goals out of that kind of domination? Definitely look at trends over multiple matches. It could be a one-off, bad day at the office.

Now, if you are seeing this in quite a few matches, then I would say it probably is being too attacking. Tweak carefully and gradually. Wholesale changes are not typically the way to go. Switching up the attacking roles is probably the best place to start. Drop one or two of the attack roles to support and watch to see the difference. One thing to be careful about is that its not just about changing the role, but changing the player can have just as much if not more of an effect. Two different players will perform differently based on skillsets and personality and definitely PPMs, even if the role, the tactic, and the rest of the team is the same. Its not usually going to be utterly different in how they perform but some difference. This is why testing on a small scale can be misleading.