No. Just no. To all of that.
The 4-2-3-1 is very different from the 4-3-3. All the midfield roles are different. They are pretty much the main examples of opposing football ideologies. VERY different midfielders are the ones needed to make a 4-3-3 work.
Of formations that are similar, the 4-2-3-1 and the 4-4-2 is the most alike.
Saying that teams only play 4-4-2 out of lack of quality is ridiculous enough. Saying it while also arguing for a 4-2-3-1...
The 4-2-3-1 is very different from the 4-3-3. All the midfield roles are different. They are pretty much the main examples of opposing football ideologies. VERY different midfielders are the ones needed to make a 4-3-3 work.
Of formations that are similar, the 4-2-3-1 and the 4-4-2 is the most alike.
Saying that teams only play 4-4-2 out of lack of quality is ridiculous enough. Saying it while also arguing for a 4-2-3-1...
4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1 both use a complete forward. Both use all out wingers. both use a 4backline and both use double wings.
difference is the center. 4-3-3 allows every type of cm. But you need to balance them. Which isnt hard. B2B, playmakers, regista's, mezzala's, actual dm's, etcetra. Most goes.
4-2-3-1 is the elite formation in that regard. You need very specific players. One holding mid is a playmaker, the other a controller and the advanced amc has to be very good at everything offensive/technical related and has good lungs
The reason why they are similar is the same. double wings and 3 central players. 4-2-3-1 requires more work from its wingers. 4-3-3 requires more quality from its wingers
There is an abundance of players for a 4-4-2. There are bitter few to make 4231 work these days. Sad, really.
