U14 and above Soccer Formation (Girls)

[Anonymous]

4-5-1 works when you go into the game knowing that you're facing a stronger team. You just need that one fast forward for the breakaway

[Anonymous]

Pretty interesting that no one has said their club has a set formation. Would set up players for success all knowing the same thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is odd.
Google tactics and formations and read up on the interplay between formations and tactics.

The responses on this thread so far - hard to play direct with only 1 striker - and references to the numerical positions - are almost sub remedial in any help or understanding.

But then again that’s this forum

Translated, you can’t follow it. What do you suggest oh wise ass?

I suggest:you have to know what your team is capable of, what the other team is trying to do, and your shape, tactics, are built on that.
At its dumbest level of explanation it is a formation that you see to start.
Same Formations can be used to play multiple ways.
A “3-5-2” or a “5-3-2” or “5-4-1” or “4-4-2” etc can almost be indistinguishable in actual play depending on how they are played.
High press , lo block , etc

For you Americans, it’s like an I formation in football. Same formation plays differently whether focused on run or pass. Or if old Peyton is QB v young Mahomes. Saying the Chiefs play a formation is pretty meaningless. Reid builds the offense. Asked on what his team can do, what other team is doing, and then tactics. Kelce plays a position as TE differently than others play same position.

That’s the point. You can resume discussing formations now. Cruyff was right about Americans

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is odd.
Google tactics and formations and read up on the interplay between formations and tactics.

The responses on this thread so far - hard to play direct with only 1 striker - and references to the numerical positions - are almost sub remedial in any help or understanding.

But then again that’s this forum

Translated, you can’t follow it. What do you suggest oh wise ass?

I suggest:you have to know what your team is capable of, what the other team is trying to do, and your shape, tactics, are built on that.
At its dumbest level of explanation it is a formation that you see to start.
Same Formations can be used to play multiple ways.
A “3-5-2” or a “5-3-2” or “5-4-1” or “4-4-2” etc can almost be indistinguishable in actual play depending on how they are played.
High press , lo block , etc

For you Americans, it’s like an I formation in football. Same formation plays differently whether focused on run or pass. Or if old Peyton is QB v young Mahomes. Saying the Chiefs play a formation is pretty meaningless. Reid builds the offense. Asked on what his team can do, what other team is doing, and then tactics. Kelce plays a position as TE differently than others play same position.

That’s the point. You can resume discussing formations now. Cruyff was right about Americans

Get off your arrogant British High-Horse or wherever you come from. If you think you’re too good for us Americans, why the hell are you in this country and commenting on US soccer youth forum? Cruyff was definitely right about us Americans. Without us, your national language would be German right now.

[Anonymous]

Half spaces is the formation we play in - Pep

Nice long balls by USMNT verse Martinique. Slow speed of play though. Berhalters 3-4-2-1 performs quite different than Pep’s at City … because they are trying to do 2 different things in 2 very different ways

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is odd.
Google tactics and formations and read up on the interplay between formations and tactics.

The responses on this thread so far - hard to play direct with only 1 striker - and references to the numerical positions - are almost sub remedial in any help or understanding.

But then again that’s this forum

Translated, you can’t follow it. What do you suggest oh wise ass?

I suggest:you have to know what your team is capable of, what the other team is trying to do, and your shape, tactics, are built on that.
At its dumbest level of explanation it is a formation that you see to start.
Same Formations can be used to play multiple ways.
A “3-5-2” or a “5-3-2” or “5-4-1” or “4-4-2” etc can almost be indistinguishable in actual play depending on how they are played.
High press , lo block , etc

For you Americans, it’s like an I formation in football. Same formation plays differently whether focused on run or pass. Or if old Peyton is QB v young Mahomes. Saying the Chiefs play a formation is pretty meaningless. Reid builds the offense. Asked on what his team can do, what other team is doing, and then tactics. Kelce plays a position as TE differently than others play same position.

That’s the point. You can resume discussing formations now. Cruyff was right about Americans

Get off your arrogant British High-Horse or wherever you come from. If you think you’re too good for us Americans, why the hell are you in this country and commenting on US soccer youth forum? Cruyff was definitely right about us Americans. Without us, your national language would be German right now.

Endearing Americans when losing arguments they like to remember wars from 75 years ago. Cite 1619 next too. Cruyff still right

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is odd.
Google tactics and formations and read up on the interplay between formations and tactics.

The responses on this thread so far - hard to play direct with only 1 striker - and references to the numerical positions - are almost sub remedial in any help or understanding.

But then again that’s this forum

Translated, you can’t follow it. What do you suggest oh wise ass?

I suggest:you have to know what your team is capable of, what the other team is trying to do, and your shape, tactics, are built on that.
At its dumbest level of explanation it is a formation that you see to start.
Same Formations can be used to play multiple ways.
A “3-5-2” or a “5-3-2” or “5-4-1” or “4-4-2” etc can almost be indistinguishable in actual play depending on how they are played.
High press , lo block , etc

For you Americans, it’s like an I formation in football. Same formation plays differently whether focused on run or pass. Or if old Peyton is QB v young Mahomes. Saying the Chiefs play a formation is pretty meaningless. Reid builds the offense. Asked on what his team can do, what other team is doing, and then tactics. Kelce plays a position as TE differently than others play same position.

That’s the point. You can resume discussing formations now. Cruyff was right about Americans

Get off your arrogant British High-Horse or wherever you come from. If you think you’re too good for us Americans, why the hell are you in this country and commenting on US soccer youth forum? Cruyff was definitely right about us Americans. Without us, your national language would be German right now.

Endearing Americans when losing arguments they like to remember wars from 75 years ago. Cite 1619 next too. Cruyff still right

You didn’t answer the PP’s first & second question, why are you in this country and why are you reading/posting on a US Youth Soccer forum?

[Anonymous]

Here I am Stupid American

[Anonymous]

At U13/14, coaches typically chooses around 2 formations. This allows the team to practice and be familiar with their roles, responsibilities and positioning. And how/where to move/rotate on offense and defense. The formations are based upon the talent/skill level of the players at each position.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is odd.
Google tactics and formations and read up on the interplay between formations and tactics.

The responses on this thread so far - hard to play direct with only 1 striker - and references to the numerical positions - are almost sub remedial in any help or understanding.

But then again that’s this forum

Translated, you can’t follow it. What do you suggest oh wise ass?

I suggest:you have to know what your team is capable of, what the other team is trying to do, and your shape, tactics, are built on that.
At its dumbest level of explanation it is a formation that you see to start.
Same Formations can be used to play multiple ways.
A “3-5-2” or a “5-3-2” or “5-4-1” or “4-4-2” etc can almost be indistinguishable in actual play depending on how they are played.
High press , lo block , etc

For you Americans, it’s like an I formation in football. Same formation plays differently whether focused on run or pass. Or if old Peyton is QB v young Mahomes. Saying the Chiefs play a formation is pretty meaningless. Reid builds the offense. Asked on what his team can do, what other team is doing, and then tactics. Kelce plays a position as TE differently than others play same position.

That’s the point. You can resume discussing formations now. Cruyff was right about Americans

You missed the point completely due to your blind arrogance. Yes, we (Americans) all know “the same formation can be used to play different ways.” The trick is, getting young kids to do it as a well as how you decide to play (slow build ups, fast counter attacks, etc). Yes, you can teach situational tactics too, but you must teach it and the kids must learn it to be successful. Equating the discussion about a 4-2-3-1 to football shows just how much you’re missing the point. Did you ever actually play or coach soccer or any sport for that matter, or are you just a sideline observer?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Half spaces is the formation we play in - Pep

Nice long balls by USMNT verse Martinique. Slow speed of play though. Berhalters 3-4-2-1 performs quite different than Pep’s at City … because they are trying to do 2 different things in 2 very different ways

Manchester city > USMNT D Team

[Anonymous]

Why can’t people read & follow the thread topic? It’s about Girls U14 soccer formation, not Professional Men’s Teams or Men’s National Teams.

[Anonymous]

Is there a difference in u14 girls v u14 boys team formations?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is odd.
Google tactics and formations and read up on the interplay between formations and tactics.

The responses on this thread so far - hard to play direct with only 1 striker - and references to the numerical positions - are almost sub remedial in any help or understanding.

But then again that’s this forum

Translated, you can’t follow it. What do you suggest oh wise ass?

I suggest:you have to know what your team is capable of, what the other team is trying to do, and your shape, tactics, are built on that.
At its dumbest level of explanation it is a formation that you see to start.
Same Formations can be used to play multiple ways.
A “3-5-2” or a “5-3-2” or “5-4-1” or “4-4-2” etc can almost be indistinguishable in actual play depending on how they are played.
High press , lo block , etc

For you Americans, it’s like an I formation in football. Same formation plays differently whether focused on run or pass. Or if old Peyton is QB v young Mahomes. Saying the Chiefs play a formation is pretty meaningless. Reid builds the offense. Asked on what his team can do, what other team is doing, and then tactics. Kelce plays a position as TE differently than others play same position.

That’s the point. You can resume discussing formations now. Cruyff was right about Americans

You missed the point completely due to your blind arrogance. Yes, we (Americans) all know “the same formation can be used to play different ways.” The trick is, getting young kids to do it as a well as how you decide to play (slow build ups, fast counter attacks, etc). Yes, you can teach situational tactics too, but you must teach it and the kids must learn it to be successful. Equating the discussion about a 4-2-3-1 to football shows just how much you’re missing the point. Did you ever actually play or coach soccer or any sport for that matter, or are you just a sideline observer?

I made my point. It is still true and accurate: formation isn’t a reflection of tactics and the tactical decision comes first. The football analogy was to break it down to average American level. Most of you can’t even tell what tactics are attempted by quality teams so to explain what M City is doing in half spaces and sectionalized field space would be like explaining quantum physics to a pig or in this case explaining soccer tactics with an American travel soccer parent.

And yes to all your questions at the top level but that doesn’t validate my statement. The validation is simply there because it is true.