A very interesting idea Craig.   I think you are sort of saying that you have to go through midfield to get the ball to the Fw line (unless I guess we assume a Longball style is played).

Anyway, what about Craig's idea?  Any room for something like every FIVE Mf area shots reduces the Fw shots by 1 or 2?  Or some other Mf shots to Fw shots ratio?

In the end this is sort of what I'm after.  Some way to introduce more "tactics" into the game rather than just show up with your 5 SL 13 Fw's and bombard the Gk.

No idea what the stats for ir would look like but I whole heartedly agree with the amplification of the midfield influence. I give you Spain and Barcelona.

There could also be an argument for limiting the number of forwards you can field - in reality, you would never see 5 FW's on the pitch at the same time, 4 would be the maximum. (Other than schoolboy level perhaps).

If you had a max of 4 FW's, I think that could open the door to having attacking and defensive midfielders and therefore make the midfield area an important consideration tactically because at the moment, you could almost bypass developing a decent midfield.

The issue seems to be that a team only needs a powerful set of Fw players to be in with a chance of success in a match. (A simplification.)

One challenge is making adjustments that don't simply change the important player type - for example, from Fw to Mf. In other words, if chances become dependent on a strong Mf, teams will build strong MF at the expense of the other types.

Another challenge is that some (many? most?) managers have some strategy or plan that they are following. A fundamental change in rules may well scupper all these plans. (I accept they make for a better game in the long run, but let's not lose sight of the short term effects.)

Craig's Suggestion - Does This Work?

As matters stand, the Fw line gets 1 shot for every point of superiority over the defense. It may be possible to tweak this to the same ratio as the relative Midfield strengths.

For example, United on the attack have (G-S-D-M-F) 16-17-20-20-60 and City have (G-S-D-M-F) 15-16-30-40-20. As matters stand, United's Fw line creates 30 shots (60-30).  

If, instead,  the shot generation were dependent on relative Mf strengths, United would generate 30 times (20/40) - their Mf/City Mf - or 30 x 1/2 or 15 shots.

City would be generating 10 shots from their Mf.

I'm offering this is a suggestion to see if we can get some detail worked into Craig's suggestion. (I have other thoughts which I will post separately.)

Al mentioned different tactics. Here's a rough and ready suggestion. 

Instead of shot generation being dependent on area superiority, make POSSESSION generation dependent on (a) area COMPARISON; and (b) Tactical choice.

For example, using the default tactic there are 24 possessions in Midfield and 12 in Defence and the Forward area. Compare relative strengths to get possessions. So, if United's Midfield is 20 and City's Midfield is 40, the ratio is 1:2 meaning United get 8 possessions from Midfield and City get 16. 

There would then need to be a way of converting possessions to shots - perhaps a comparison of the best Fw against the best Df? I am sure the collective brains trust here could come up with something useful.

Then, the number of possessions is tweaked for choice of tactic. For example, a Long Ball tactic might generate 16 potential possessions in Defence and Forward, but only 8 in Midfield. A Counterattack tactic might generate 20 potential possessions in Defence, 12 in Midfield and 8 in Forward, and so on. 

What would stop this turning the game into a guessing contest? Perhaps teams would be limited in the choice of tactics so they could not freely switch at will. 

I appreciate it radically changes the United mechanics. Perhaps, however, it will inspire someone to come up with a better suggestion!

While I remember, does it help if we change the offside rule so that you may still play a Sweeper using that tactic?

And finally(!) - for now - the passing game: the ball starts off with the home team in Midfield. They have a chance to advance the ball to their Forward line. If they fail, the opposition take over in Midfield. If they succeed, the ball is now with their Forward line. They have a chance to create an opening. If they fail, the opposition take over in Defence (and have to try and work the ball to their Midfield). If they succeed, they get an opening for a shot which the opposing Sweeper, if any gets a chance to block. And so on, and so on. 

It would be a wholesale rewrite of the match mechanics. It would, however, nullify the killer Forward line for good (I hope) and make overall team building better in the long run. It might be too luck dependent. It might be boring. (Although maybe incorporating tactical bonuses might spice things up.)  

I hope these posts generate useful discussion.

2:1 instead of 3:1 ?

What about eliminating the min # of FWs... that way, teams could play 1-4-5-0... or 0-4-5-1, loading up on Defense and having a very strong Midfield. Yes, they would give up some shots to the DF, but they would be able to limit the FW shots from the opposition and still get a lot of MF shots. 

It's a simple change that wouldn't require a lot of tactical changes from the managers and could have a significant impact.