So, after playing this game for close to a decade, one thing certainly stand out. The great big tendency towards formation-selection is manager going heavy on the 3-4-3. If you want further proof your welcome to dive into round-to-round statistics with fpldiscovery.wordpress.com. Most likey you've allready registered this trend, and probably also noted that, bar the odd Gameweek, its also your own preferred formation. I've checked two of my minileagues where i believe the best competition is, and the results were not surprising. Out of a total of 47 managers, fplmystats.com could show me to me that 44 managers had a preferred formation of 3-4-3. This post will debate some of the points as to why i think this "phenomenom" exists, then in posts to come I will try and debate whether we actually should take it for granted that this is the best formation.
Why managers play 3-4-3
- "getting money on the pitch"
Whether this happens as a detailed thoughtprocess by the managers or not, I do believe this counts for a lot. I went a long way stating this as the "101" in my post on how to approach the game. And make no mistake, playing 3-4-3 definately gives you the best conditions for putting your money on the field. By design, the creators of the game seem to have given the friendliest prices to goalies ande defenders. At the start of the season the lowest priced goalies and defenders are placed at 4.0, while the lowest in the two attacking thirds are priced at 4.5.
What this means, is that by playing the most extreme form of moneygame you could play a 3-4-3 by benching one 4.0goalie, two 4.0 defenders and one 4,5 midfielder. In other words putting away 16,5m at the bench and fielding the remaining 83,5m. The only other formation where this is possible, is by playing the secondmost favourite formation of the game: 3-5-2. With every defender you add to the formation, the formation essentially becomes "more expensive". Example: With 5-3-2 or 5-2-3 the very cheapest total you'd be able to bench would be 17,5m, meaning every defender you add to your formation essentially costs you 0,5 million on the pitch.
Furthermore one should propably not use the lowest prices in each position when discussing formations. Mot players, and correctly so, actually care about their bench, and have it as a bare minimum that the players on their bench do get regular playing time with their clubs. Failing to do so will cost poits in the long run. This means that in general one has to shed some extra pounds to make sure one has a proper bench. With this being the case, it actually furthermore puts 3-4-3 in a runaway position in regards to getting money on the pitch. In the category of goalies and defenders, there's a giant well of viable 4,5m options due to get serious gametime, with over 20 players having logged more than 1500mins sofar. To get somewhere in line with the same amount of options in midfield one has to include all players up to 6m, and for attackers its even worse with only 9 players, regardless of price, having played the same amount of numbers. Setting the cap for forwards at 6.0m atleast gives some options offering 10 players with more than 1000mins of playing time. However surely this shows that as far as benching "cheap-but-sure-to-get-mins-players" defenders are in a league of their own.
- "preferring attacking returns over defensive ones"
When watching your own team hopefully you're able to give FPL a complete shutdown and keep focus on enjoying it when your teams on top, and curse all of your players, the management, the owners and everyone on the goddamn planet when they're not. However, when you're watching games with no personal interests besides FPL something happens. So much more pops up. Ahead of the games you "certainly expect your players to start", you expect them all to play well, to get goals, to get assists, to get bps, and get... yuck cleans. When deciding on who to choose this almost allways kicks in. Time and time again this season i've seen managers opt for attacking players like Abraham, Calvert Lewin, Diouf, Rondon, Joselu, Ayew, (list goes on), ahead of decent defensive options, even though only one of these players have secured attacking returns in more than 5 matches. Only two clubs have failed to keep more than 5 clean sheets so far this season (CP and B'mouth), but this does'nt stop us managers from blissfully neglecting to give defenders more of a go. The fact seems to be that we allways fancy the chance of a goal over the chance of clean. Perhaps this is du to pure ignorance, or perhaps its due to the relative ceiling of what players in different positions can produce. For some it might be neither, I've actually time and time heard friends, who are seasoned managers of the game say stuff like "I chose him over him just cause i did'nt wanna spend 90mins of hoping for a goalles match!".
- "Wanting all the top-dawgs"
Much in line with the point about getting the money on the pitch, this point is fairly related but, also kinda different. What almost allways hits you when youre having a spell of red arrows is that your missing either one or two of the top dawgs that others have chosen to back. One month its Hazard, another its Sanchez, Kane, Aguero and so on. Given the fact most managers believe that balancing the big dawgs, having them in and out of their teams, based on form, fixtures and price raise/price loss, means that they need to have their money in the right parts of the pitch. Given that most managers would probably need to have only expensive defenders from the top sides to opt for a different formation than 3-4-3, this means that they need to be willing to "lock away" a couple of millions in positions that would require a lot of transfers to get back in the space of where you look to put one of the top-dawgs.
- "Dream-teams and player of the week suggests that its the most successfull formation"
Every week theres a lot of excitement checking who the GW-winner had in his team, or who made this weeks dream-team, or whos currently in this seasons dream-team. One reccurring theme seems to be that in most cases these teams consist of players forming a 3-4-3 or 3-5-2 formation. This should'nt come as a suprise. When playing in the buisness-end of the pitch the ceiling is much higher, and the returns from a player can be far more explosive. This might well indeed very subtely give us the impression that one should allways aim to field the team with the highest ceiling. After all, who forgets the feiling of playing Jordi Gomez when he bagged a hat-trick, or playing Etienne Capoue for 3 gw's straight giving doubledigitreturns.
This will be the first of several posts debating formations, hopefully those of you reading these posts willfind it informative. Cheers!