EA FC 25 Team Comparison: Man United vs Leicester City

EA FC 25 Team Comparison: Man United vs Leicester City

Manchester United vs. Leicester City is an eagerly anticipated match-up in the Premier League that is sure to captivate fans as both teams seek valuable points to improve their standings. In the realm of virtual play, particularly within EA FC 25, we gain a unique perspective on which team may hold an advantage based on their in-game statistics and player ratings.

This article will thoroughly analyze and compare the squads of Manchester United and Leicester City, ultimately aiming to determine which team comes out on top in the EA FC 25 universe.

Head-to-Head: Club Comparison in EA FC 25

Man United vs Leicester City: Starting XI comparison
Starting XI Comparison: Manchester United vs. Leicester City (Image via EA Sports)

In EA FC 25, both Manchester United and Leicester City utilize the popular 4-2-3-1 formation. United’s striking position features Joshua Zirkzee with 73 Pace, 77 Shooting, and 83 Dribbling. In contrast, Leicester showcases Jamie Vardy, whose attributes include 74 Pace, 78 Shooting, and 72 Dribbling.

Shifting to the midfield dynamics, Manchester United boasts the talents of Bruno Fernandes, excelling as a Central Attacking Midfielder with impressive stats of 85 Shooting, 88 Passing, and 83 Dribbling. Contrarily, Leicester relies on Facundo Buonanotte, with ratings of 67 Shooting, 70 Passing, and 76 Dribbling.

The United midfield is reinforced with the speed and skill of Marcus Rashford (89 Pace, 76 Passing, 82 Dribbling) on the left, while Antony (82 Pace, 72 Passing, 82 Dribbling) stands on the right. Their defensive midfield is anchored by Casemiro (77 Passing, 82 Defending) and Manuel Ugarte (73 Passing, 78 Defending).

Man United vs Leicester City: CAM comparison
Central Attacking Midfielder Comparison: Man United vs. Leicester City (Image via EA Sports)

Leicester City counters this with players like Bobby De Cordova-Reid (74 Pace, 72 Passing, 76 Dribbling) and Abdul Fatawu (84 Pace, 74 Passing, 78 Dribbling) in similar roles. Moreover, Wilfred Ndidi (73 Passing, 75 Defending) and Oliver Skipp (68 Passing, 75 Defending) bolster their defensive midfield.

Defensively, United’s backline is composed of Diogo Dalot (85 Pace, 79 Defending) at left back, with a strong central duo of Lisandro Martinez and Matthijs de Ligt, each boasting an 85 Defending rating. On the right side, Noussair Mazraoui (78 Pace, 77 Defending) completes the defense. Leicester’s defense features Victor Kristiansen (73 Pace, 71 Defending) as left back, and Jannik Vestergaard (75 Defending) alongside Wout Faes (77 Defending) at center back, with Ricardo Pereira (73 Pace, 77 Defending) on the right.

In terms of goalkeeping, Manchester United has the advantage with star keeper Andre Onana rated 83 Overall, while Leicester’s Mads Hermansen rates at 76 Overall.

Tactical Insights: Player Roles

Man United vs Leicester City: Player Roles
Player Roles Analysis: Manchester United vs. Leicester City (Image via EA Sports)

Effective tactical setups are determined by specific Player Roles that assign unique duties and responsibilities to players based on their skills. A player with a ‘+’ or ‘++’ rating for their role is often deemed a strong fit, which can significantly influence match outcomes.

The illustration above indicates that Manchester United players tend to receive more strong ratings in their assigned roles. This suggests a potential tactical edge over Leicester City in the gameplay dynamics of EA FC 25.

Conclusion: Who Takes the Edge?

Upon comprehensive assessment, it is clear that Manchester United not only fields better-rated players but also appears more tactically adept based on Player Roles when compared to Leicester City. Thus, for players and fans alike, Manchester United emerges as the superior team in the EA FC 25 universe.

  • Strength in Player Ratings
  • Tactical Advantages in Player Roles

For more in-depth analysis, you can check the original source here.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *