New Chelsea manager Frank Lampard already likes his wingers to stay narrow or cut in aggressively. A 4-3-2-1 would be a small twist.
Frank Lampard likes his wingers to be closer to the striker than the touchline. The main reason is that it will draw more opposition players towards one area of the field as a fullback waits as an outlet in acres of space. It is about pulling the opposition one way before yanking them another and then finding the gaps in between to exploit.
And because of that, the line between 4-3-3 and 4-3-2-1 is blurred. If the wingers do not need to stay wide but do need to be comfortable closer to the center, then there is less of a need for true wingers. Much like a 4-diamond-2, the formation allows for more “part-time” wingers than true wingers.
The difference does not seem like much, but operationally it allows for the use of much different players. Since the wingers do not need to stay wide, almost any attacking mid could play the part. That would give Lampard more flexibility in his sections than a standard 4-3-3.
If this conversation sounds similar, that is because it is. Antonio Conte also used three attackers, but some would call the formation a 3-4-3 and others a 3-4-2-1. Conte did often use wingers in both side roles so the line is blurred, but in the case of Eden Hazard and Willian, those wingers started their careers as attacking mids.
And like Conte, a 2-1 attacking front would allow for the use of Ruben Loftus-Cheek and Ross Barkley further up the pitch. It would also suit Willian, Christian Pulisic, and even Callum Hudson-Odoi who all started their development as 10s rather than wingers.
Using 4-3-2-1 as the base formation also allows for the side to react to the opponent. If two wingers are needed, two wingers can be used giving it a true 4-3-3 look. In most cases, the 2-1 could also flip into a 1-2 if the space demands for it. And because one attacking midfielder would be playing higher up, Lampard could put yet another midfielder on to control the game.
The draw backs to a 4-3-2-1 would be similar to the 4-diamond-2 however. The fullbacks would have a lot asked of them coming and going. The entire system would demand fluidity which means losing the ball could quickly go from disappointing to catastrophic.
But time would help that fluidity work. A front three including Pulisic, Hudson-Odoi, and any true striker could easily flow between a 4-3-3, 4-diamond-2, and 4-3-2-1 as the game required. Put Loftus-Cheek or Barkley in the midfield three to rotate into wide areas and the formation could solve almost any issue the opponent presents.
Ultimately, the formation that Lampard goes with will be more of a matter of perspective than anything. His 4-3-3 looks a lot like a 4-3-2-1 and because the line between 10s and 8s is getting blurred, it could also be called a 4-2-3-1.
Regardless, Lampard has options besides the standard 4-3-3 that he should spend preseason exploring. His job will be to get the best team on the field, not to shoe horn them into the way he thinks is best.