OK, I'd agree about the system based on your reasoning that Everton was a stronger side and the 3-5-2 system was to make it harder for them to get to the goal.

However, Palace was playing at home. I mean, Everton is not that big of a team, not one we should be afraid of. At least not on home ground. The thing is, it wasn't just for this match. Allardyce will use this same system against Sunderland, Swansea, Hull or Bournemouth. How many points will be added until the end of the season with 3-5-2?

You're right about Schlupp. He can play higher in this system. Though Ward as right wing is really really poor. That's the difference between a team like Everton playing this system with Coleman and Baines, who are both excellent crossers and proven offensive throughout the years and a team like Palace playing with unproven Schlupp and defensive Ward.

And I disagree with your argument that the best way to counter a team playing 3-5-2 is by playing a similar formation.

Every wannabe manager who wants to claim "I changed something" goes from the 4 back line to the 5 back back line. If it worked for Juventus and, until now, for Chelsea, it doesn't mean it will work for everyone.
Juventus dominates an Italian football because they spend the most money, they could play whatever system. In Alegri's first year they played 4-4-2 and still came first (with a midfield of Pirlo, Marchisio, Pogba and Vidal)

This 3-5-2 formation basically puts in an extra center back. That's it. You take out an attacking player and put in an extra central defender. Not even a side defender, but a CENTRAL DEFENDER. It's a great tactic when you meet better teams, when you play qualifying matches or away games.

But when you play in a championship and you'd rather have a win and a loss from 2 games instead of 2 draws (cause 3 points are better than 2) then having an extra center back in the first 11 is not what you want.

What was the team against Everton? No Townsend or Zaha, Remy came on and Tomkins got a start. Notice? Remy for Townsend, offensive player for offensive player. Tomkins for Zaha, defensive player for offensive player.

Yes, Schlupp was a great improvement from Ward, because he's basically a left wing and Ward wasn't even left footed.

Whoever was around in 2002 remembers that this had happened before. The Italian teams were highly regarded and their 5 defenders system was exported in all the world. Pretty much every team at the 2002 World Cup played 3-5-2.

But after that....everyone woke up. People saw that teams scored a lot less. Everywhere. So pretty much every team gave up that extra defender for an extra attacking man.

It doesn't work for Sunderland, it doesn't work for Hull, it doesn't work for Watford.
It only works for Chelsea and it's been recently tried at Everton too, though we'll see in the long term. They have very offensive fullbacks though in Baines and Coleman.

I sometimes wonder about the posters on here. We have no left back of any quality and it's clearly been a problem all season. Playing 3 at the back provides a solution. Jeez

IF Schlupp is not quality, why have we just paid all that money for him?