Hello
First time poster - long time FM fan....
I was hoping to get some help tactically - I've traditionally played 4 at the back, two in. midfield, with inverted wingers and a false 9 off an advanced forward - my midfielders have been a DLP and a defensive ball winning midfielder....
I want to try something new - ditch the inverted wingers.... I am thinking of 3 centre halves, 2. wing backs and a defensive midfielder...... two strikers - one poacher or advanced forward with a Trequestia or false 9 along side them - stretch the opposition's. defence with one striker going in behind and another dropping off.... hardly revolutionary I know lol - the 3 at the back and denfensive midfielder should make us solid at the back and the. wing backs provide width....
so to my question - the two midfielders - they can be attacking I think - given the base provided by the formation - I was wondering if I could play with two Mezzala's? Or a Mezzala and an advanced play maker?
Are two Mezzala's. viable?
Any help appreciated
J
First time poster - long time FM fan....
I was hoping to get some help tactically - I've traditionally played 4 at the back, two in. midfield, with inverted wingers and a false 9 off an advanced forward - my midfielders have been a DLP and a defensive ball winning midfielder....
I want to try something new - ditch the inverted wingers.... I am thinking of 3 centre halves, 2. wing backs and a defensive midfielder...... two strikers - one poacher or advanced forward with a Trequestia or false 9 along side them - stretch the opposition's. defence with one striker going in behind and another dropping off.... hardly revolutionary I know lol - the 3 at the back and denfensive midfielder should make us solid at the back and the. wing backs provide width....
so to my question - the two midfielders - they can be attacking I think - given the base provided by the formation - I was wondering if I could play with two Mezzala's? Or a Mezzala and an advanced play maker?
Are two Mezzala's. viable?
Any help appreciated
J