3-5-2 defensive principles

[jotadia]

great post!

[Coryattheplex]

Zozojar

What you say about forcing the oppositions backs to play long ball is correct. We have our forwards responsible for pressuring the outlet ball and forcing it wide where we can trap an outside back on the sideline and for him to hit a desperation ball down line or across the middle. The key is getting the whole team to move as a unit and not allow any space in the middle third where the short penetrating passes will kill your teams shape.

[kevbrunton]

Just caught this thread and thought I'd throw in a couple notes...

My son's team plays this formation or a variation. He plays for a top 20 nationally ranked team -- U17 this year. They've played this formation for the last 2 years. He's coached by a D1 college head coach.

They play a flat back 3 zone in the defense. They play either 5-2 or 4-3 in front of them depending upon what the other team is doing.

When they play 5-2, they play with 1 defensive mid, 2 attacking mids and 2 outside mids. They generally play the 3-5-2 when the opponents are playing with 4 backs -- we outnumber their midfield and break down the center of their defense.

When the opponent has only 3 backs as in a 3-5-2, that's when we go with the 3-4-3 and we put their outside backs under pressure creating a LOT of odd-man situations on the outsides. When we play the 3-4-3, the outside mids tend to attack more to the middle than when we play the 3-5-2.

As far as the defense goes, the back 3 are EXTREMELY well organized -- they pass guys off so well playing their zone and man marking within the zone. They talk extremely well to slide when one zone gets overloaded. Our outside mids are very fast and have good work rates. When they're needed for defensive help, they're there.

In fact, the overall team speed of this team is very good. The only two guys on the field that DON'T have great speed are 2 of the center and left backs. Our right back generally covers a lot of breakaways when teams try to play long ball against us.

I'm not sure if I've added anything here other than the notion that it's very easy to adjust out of the 3-5-2 into a 3-4-3. Defensively they're identical because in either case we defend with 3 defenders with help as needed from 1 defensive mid and 2 outside mids.

Attacking wise, the different formation allows you to adjust to attack the other teams weakness -- and it may not necessarily be just based upon formation. If the opponent is playing a 4-4-2 but has weak outside backs, our 3-4-3 would put forwards on those outside backs that would eat 'em up.

[Reality_Al]

Great post! Your adjustments w/in the 3-5-2 is why I call it the Flex-5. If you layout the formation as 3 backs 2 back-mids(1 for attack, one for defense), 2 wide attacking mids w/a center mid and 2 forwards(technically a 3-2-3-2)
you can flex up or back as the other team or the game dictates.
If you move the 2 back-mids up, it's a 3-5-2. Move the center mid up, it's a 3-4-3. Also, one of the outside mids can move up, with the remaining spreading wider, and it becomes a 3-3-4.
One of the better parts is that you can have 7 attacking the box, or 5 defending your own goal.
I love this FLEX-5 formation!

[Joe Hadar]

I'm a high school coach. Last year I started playing 352 or 532 with the idea that my wingers would move up and down the flank. The problem: there is very little flank on a 55 yard wide football field.

Do you change your system at all, when faced with a narrow field?

[Coryattheplex]

Originally posted by Joe Hadar
I'm a high school coach. Last year I started playing 352 or 532 with the idea that my wingers would move up and down the flank. The problem: there is very little flank on a 55 yard wide football field.

Do you change your system at all, when faced with a narrow field?

Yes, we went with a 3-4-3 and pushed our attacking mid to forward, and one of our def mids to attacking mid. We had the personel to do this, not everyone has that many central mids who can adapt to either offensive or defensive approach. Your goal will probably be to contain the other teams attack, and push your own counters into the deep wing slots......good luck

[Joe Hadar]

That's good news, because (after reading Anson Dorrance's book) I am considering switching to a 3-4-3 to improve player development.

[Coryattheplex]

Originally posted by Joe Hadar
That's good news, because (after reading Anson Dorrance's book) I am considering switching to a 3-4-3 to improve player development.
I am a firm believer in not trying to fit your kids around a system, or a system around your kids. You need to find a system that fits them, that is well suited to their strenghts yes, but at the building stage you probably want to find one that fits their weaknesses even better. To have them play in a system that allows them to do one thing well, like score, but exposes their weaknesses in defense, is only going to lead to frustration and losses that can't be easily explained.

[schmuckatelli]

Originally posted by Coryattheplex

I am a firm believer in not trying to fit your kids around a system, or a system around your kids. You need to find a system that fits them, that is well suited to their strenghts yes, but at the building stage you probably want to find one that fits their weaknesses even better. To have them play in a system that allows them to do one thing well, like score, but exposes their weaknesses in defense, is only going to lead to frustration and losses that can't be easily explained.
How true this is - at the end of the day, they play soccer, not systems! The reason my U-14 Boys side plays a 3-5-2 is that we have an abundance of kids who play midfield well. We have considerable commitment, but we don't have a lot of true defenders, nor strikers. Interestingly, it sometimes ends up more like a (de facto) 3-4-3 or a 4-5-1, depending on how we adjust to the team we're facing, but we ususally start out the day playing 3-5-2.