Why I Use So Many Women in My FC 26 Squad

I do not have a perfect scientific explanation for this.

I just feel better playing with many female players in FC 26.

That is probably not the most satisfying tactical answer, but it is the honest one. Some cards simply feel better in game than their stats suggest, and for me, a lot of those cards are women.

Part of it is probably body size.

Smaller players in FC have a certain advantage. They take shorter steps, they can shift direction faster, and they often feel more responsive when you need to turn quickly. If a player has pace, pace is still pace. A shorter player does not become slower just because their stride is shorter. So in theory, they can keep the speed while feeling sharper on the ball.

But that explanation is not perfect.

If it were only about height, then I should feel exactly the same with short male players. I am not sure I do. There is something about certain female cards that just feels right to me, especially in specific positions.

LB/RB

The biggest example is probably wingback.

At LB and RB, I usually try to use shorter women, but not overly lean ones. I often prefer something closer to average.

I do not fully know why, but those cards work really well for me.

They feel like they can squeeze through tight spaces on the wing. When they are running down the line, they somehow manage to get past players, survive contact better than I expect, and keep the move alive. They also feel very good when changing direction quickly, which matters a lot because my wingbacks are not just defending.

They are constantly involved.

In my system, they go up and down the touchline all game. They overlap, they attack space, they sometimes get into shooting positions, and then they still need to get back. So I do not want wingbacks who feel heavy. I want players who can turn, accelerate, recover, and keep moving.

That is where these cards often feel great.

ST

Striker is different.

There, I do not like players who are too tall, but I also do not like players who are too small.

Very tall strikers can feel a bit too stiff for my style. They may be strong, but they are not always quick enough in small movements. I need my strikers to turn, find angles, and react quickly around the box.

But very small strikers can disappear.

They may be agile, but sometimes I feel like they do not impose themselves enough. They can get lost between defenders. I do not notice them quickly enough when I need to make a fast pass. Physically, they can struggle to hold their place.

So for striker, I like something in the middle.

One player who really shaped this for me is Alessia Russo. I have used her, and she just feels right. Her height and weight seem close to the type of striker I enjoy. Since then, when I look for ST cards, I often think: is this player close to that profile?

Not exactly the same, but close enough.

That is the kind of striker I trust more.

CM

At CM, I always use women.

The difference is that I do not have such a clear body-type preference there. At wingback and striker, I can describe quite precisely what kind of player feels good to me. In midfield, it is less obvious.

I still prefer women in those roles, but I care more about the stats and PlayStyles. I wrote more about my PlayStyle priorities in Which PlayStyles I Prefer in FC 26.

So it is not that gender does not matter to me at CM. It does.

It is just that height and body type matter less there than they do in some other positions.

Where I Usually Do Not Use Women

There are also positions where I usually do not use female players.

Goalkeeper is the obvious one. Height matters too much. A taller keeper can reach shots that a shorter keeper simply cannot. Maybe there are exceptions, but in general, I prefer height there.

Center-back is another position where I am more careful. I think physicality matters a lot, especially strength, reach, and presence. I am not saying women cannot work at CB. I just have not tested it enough, and instinctively I still prefer more physical profiles there.

The surprising one is CAM.

And the reason is not really gameplay stats. It is visual.

In my setup, both central midfielders are always women, and both strikers are often women too. So I like having a male CAM between them. He becomes a visual reference point. When everything is moving quickly, it helps my eyes locate the structure of my attack. He is like an anchor in the middle.

That sounds strange, but in game it matters.

I also use him as a Classic 10, so he does not move around as much. Because of that, he does not need to be as agile as the players around him. His job is different. I mainly use him for incisive passes into the strikers or shots from the edge of the box.

So for CAM, I do not need the same sharp movement profile. I need calmness, passing, shooting, and a player I can visually find quickly.

It Is Mostly Feel

I know this is not a perfect explanation.

A lot of it is feel. Some of it is probably body type, height, animations, stride length, physical presence, and how the game engine handles movement. Some of it might just be personal preference.

But that is also part of FC.

Stats matter, but they do not explain everything. Two cards can look similar on paper and feel completely different in game. Sometimes the card that works best for you is not the one that looks most logical.

For me, many female cards just fit the way I play.

My wingbacks need to fly up and down the wing. My strikers need to be mobile but still visible and strong enough. My midfielders are always women too, but there I care more about the card profile than one exact body type. And my CAM gives the whole attack a visual reference point.

So no, I do not use so many women because I have a perfect formula.

I use them because the game feels better that way.

If you want to see how this all fits into my overall setup, I wrote more about the formation itself in 5-2-1-2: A Magical Formation?