Training Overhaul

I responded to a point earlier in the Man Utd data thread about Giggs "natural position" now being centre mid when he has been a left winger all his career. My take on it is that the term "natural" is a bit of a misnomer, and actually means best, and that the problem with the game is there is no development over time of a player's best position, their natural position is set in stone. This means there are no younsters who show potential in a number of positions before finding their niche (or being utility men for ever), we can't see a new manager rejuvenate a player with his different opinion on a player's "best" position, and like Giggs we can't see an older player adapt his game and prolong his career at the top by moving into a role which suits him more at that stage - in game a player's "best" position is set in stone as natural, and while if we feel his attributes suggest he would be better off elsewhere we can retrain him, his "natural" ability in the other will never fade, and he will never be permanently "natural" in his more suited position. Thinking about this led me on to thinking about the way training in game is structured as a whole, and I have some ideas about how it could be vastly improved. The more I thought it through the more I realised how changing one area would mean and a knock on change elsewhere, so I've ended outlining pretty wholesale changes to some of the foundations of the game. Hopefully some of the ideas will provoke some discussion over how the game can move forwards. Mammoth essay to follow so give up now if you ain't got time.

******************

The training system at the moment is very rigid. There is one way to do it, and that is to strive to achieve a "perfect" training system, with each position having its own balanced schedule which develops players as you want them for that role, and 7 star coached in every area. Pretty much every player that plays FM is trying to achieve that, and once you are happy with your coaching set up it will usually stay for ever, regardless of the level of your club (other than p/t) or the system you play. How many players when they are on a losing run will look at their training schedules to try and turn things around? Very few I would suggest. Training should be a much bigger part of the game, for me. It should constantly present new challenges, be related to your system and style and, crucially, should have a number of equally valid ways to approach it, each of which could be successful in different ways, or at different levels, or with different players.

Pre-Season and Fitness

Pre-season is one of the most important times of year for a football club. Get it right and you will reap the rewards by being quicker out of the blocks and/or lasting the distance better. Too much work and your players could burn out too quick, too little and it'll take them a long time to build into the season. In FM, it's far too easy to get away with ignoring it. It's quite normal to leave all your players on general training either forever or until it takes your fancy to set up your training. This usually gives you no adverse affects, and as long as you play a few friendlies you can get your players "match fit". This isn't realistic.

I make having a proper pre-season mandatory. A player's condition would reflect his physical fitness, and would be independent of his injury status and his level of "jadedness". After a summer off players would come back with varying degrees of fitness, dependent on their personality attributes, presumably professionalism being the main one. The difference would be that the aim would not necessarily be to hit 100%. This is a big jump from the current set up, which generally involves simply waiting for a player's condition to regenerate to near 100% before building his match fitness and sending him out, so I'll explain myself.

Depending on the type of manager you are and the system you want to play you might not want to place too much emphasis on fitness, and depending on the level of the club, the level of your players, the staff and facilities available to you it may not be possible to reach 100%. For example, team A is a newly promoted Premiership side. The manager has plenty of cash to consolidate his status and wants to pack the midfield and play a high energy pressing game to try and upset better sides. All his players are full time, he has the money to employ a good fitness coach and has good facilities, so there are no real constraints on him achieving good fitness levels. He sets up an intensive pre season schedule and works his players as hard as possible. Depending on the individual players (natural fitness, as well as things like professionalism and so on) he could achieve high 80s and 90s% condition for his players.

Team B is a Scottish 3rd division side. Their players are part time, and even though the manager is looking to play a high tempo pressing style he only has limited time and resources. This would mean that he can only reach perhaps somewhere in the 60s for the majority of his players. This does not mean they are not fit enough to play, because for one thing they will line up against sides who are in the same situation, so it will be relative. Obviously it means that when a tie comes along which bridges divisions in the cup, we will see the difference a professional coaching set up makes in terms of the fitness of the players. In our examples Team B would not be able to harry Team A all match without tiring severely, and Team A would have a good chance of wearing Team B down and scoring late on when they tire.

Obviously this would have to reconcile with physical attributes in some way, I haven't fully worked this out but here are some thoughts anyway, any input would be appreciated. Perhaps the distribution of your training will mean will you maximize the potential physical attributes of your squad in different ways. If you concentrate on running you will fill out your squads "maximum" stamina (i.e. the stamina they have set in the DB, or obviously higher if they have potential to improve), and if you concentrate on weights strength. 100% condition would presumably be if you had a player fully trained, and so had filled out everything they could have. Obviously some stats would be more affected than others, for example if a player had 20 stamina (this would be the most strongly affected attribute) set in the DB but only achieved 60% fitness it would significantly lower, maybe not as low as 12 but close, but a 20 pace would still be a 17/18 or so as it is not so dependent on having a great pre-season.

There would be no problem with a player going into a season with a 70% or so fitness, but obviously you would have to rotate him more, or give him less work to do than a player with 90%. Players with lower fitness would not be able to play too many games in a row without being affected. There would be obviously cons to overtraining as well. Players at peak fitness are suceptible to different kinds of injuries than those with lower fitness. This would allow you to manage players with high injury proness - you could deliberately "under train" say Michael Owen, or Robin Van Persie, so as to prevent these types of injury, and then manage their game time to preserve their effectiveness. Good physio and coaching staff would advise you of when and how to do this.

Injuries would then be treated separately from condition - a player who got a knock on their ankle would sit out training for a few days but their fitness would not change, they would just be unavailable. A longer injury would see a player unable to train for longer and that would mean their fitness would start to decrease. A player with a cruciate knee ligament injury would have his fitness decline rapidly when he was inactive, then rebuild very slowly during his rehab. Once his knee was fully strengthened, it would then be up to you to set his training, similar to a pre-season, to build his fitness again. Too much would risk him breaking down again. Bring him back at 50% fitness and be forced to only use him sporadically, or let him build right up to 70% and play plenty of reserve football but see him miss a much bigger period? Players returning from long injuries would often struggle to make an impact that season as their fitness would not be high, waiting for the following season when, in classic footballing cliche, they would have "a good pre-season behind them".

This would add a whole new dimention to the game. Obviously some players prefer a more arcade experience, but that is simply catered for - an option to allow your assistant manager to handle it. He will put them on a generic pre season program which willl get them to an average fitness level, obviously varying depending on how good he is and the other variables.

Positional Training

This is where my thoughts on positions come into play. One thing you would have to decide with each player is where you see them playing. For example, I could take over Man Utd and decide I see Cristiano Ronaldo as a striker. He would then "train" as a striker; that is to say that his rating /20 for striker would improve or stay at 20, as long as I did use him there. Unless I specifically trained him in other areas, or my staff's abilities were heavily weighted towards other areas, it would also be his striker attributes (those which take the most CA points for a striker) which would be trained. His already present attributes in these areas would contribute to how fast his rating /20 for striker improves - if the game agrees in terms of his attributes that he is suited to being a striker, it will be easy for him to learn that role. It is also "close" to his current known roles, which would also influence how quickly he could learn it. If I try to train him as a centre half it will be nigh on impossible because he isn't good at tackling, marking etc.

You could also set more positions to train, or retain. I thought this could work one of two ways. Firstly on a primary/secondary basis; Striker would be set as a primary position, one which he is actively trying to learn. I also want him to improve as a centre mid, so I set that as a primary position too, which takes a hefty hit of his overall training percentage. This means he will also show general improvement (assuming he has the PA) in centre mid stats on an equal footing with striker ones, assuming I don't focus him elsewhere. I also want him to retain ability on the right wing, so I set it as a secondary position - it won't improve but it will only degenerate very slowly and only to a point, and if I give him game time there it won't at all. It will take less of his training time and will see a secondary improvement to his attributes for a winger. The second way would be to have a slider system, allowing you to set an independent level for each position and give them priority, with matching percentages of his training time.

To give an example, at Man Utd I would set John O'Shea to have a number of secondary positions (or medium sliders) for CB, RB, LB and DM, so as to avoid him losing points in any area. His general attribute training would go in these areas. He wouldn't improve his ratings /20 in any position, but given that he is well suited to these positions he wouldn't lose ability either and would remain a valuable utility man. On the other hand if I signed him for West Brom and saw him as a first pick at centre half, I would set it as a primary position (or a slider all the way up). His other positions would all degenerate (slowly because they are ones he is suited to, but nevertheless) and CB would become natural if it isn't already. His general training would focus on CB attributes.

This would allow for youngsters with no real natural position who would then be developed and moulded by you, meaning there development would be less linear and more down to the player. Youngsters might be regened with no natural position, or one which does not suit them (Patrice Evra as a striker). It would be up to you to realise their potential in another position and train them accordingly, and they would quickly pick up the position if they suited it. Obviously training a player who was "natural" in striker would take some time to train as a left back because the positions have no similarity. If you succeeded in making the player a natural left back, he never played up front and was poor in key striker attributes, his "natural" striker position would eventually disappear completely.

This kind of system would also allow more leeway with systems and with the research - most full backs could play wing back to a decent level, and most LMs can play AML and vice versa, but if a player never plays there then why put a rating in? This then causes a problem for the gamer who wants to play a 3-5-2 but has no accomplished or natural wing backs in the squad. This way, as IRL, setting their primary position as WBL or R at the start of pre season and giving them some game time will be enough to let most FBs bed in, because the positions are similar and the important attributes for each are similar. This allows the user more freedom and makes for a more realistic gaming experience.

In Season Training

Having worked the players to fitness in pre-season and decided on their role in your set up, you now have the remaing 90/80 whatever % of your players training to think of. I would have a general team training screen, where you would have to set your general training. This might involve some fitness work if you are looking to maintain or increase your players fitness during the season. If you are managing Barcelona, you might set predominantly passing and moving exercises, working in confined spaces, touch and movement. This would not just lead to a general trend towards the related attributes rising, but would also increase the effectiveness of playing a passing style of football. On the other hand, focusing on defensive drills, organisation at set pieces, or constantly working on the offside trap could pay dividends defensively, as well as generally improving the defensive attributes of your players. You could choose to run shooting drills, practise penalties, and so on and so on. Rather than the rigid system at the moment, and the previous one, where a certain area of training or a certain exercise would raise a specific set of attributes, this would be more intuitive, with differing mixes making different results. Training then would not only determine how players fill out their CA, but also how well your system works. Tailoring your training to your system and vice versa, focusing your players on the right roles, and getting the blend right should mean you could succeed with a long ball game, a defensive system, a fluid attacking system, or whatever you feel is best for the players. It would be nigh on impossible to develop "super tactics" and perfect training systems, because these would all relate to each other and each players would be different.

This team training schedule would fill up whatever the vacant percentage of the players training was, but groups or individuals could also be put on their own separate schedules, focusing on a specific set or even a single attribute. You could have a youngster who shows some promise as a free kick specialist hit free kicks for a quarter of the day, every day, and get him a 20. He might lose out in other areas, but you've got that one specialty. A young player who seems perfect for a position put has one key weakness could focus on that. Obviously your goalkeeper would predominantly be set on his own exercises. Obviously PPM training would take a percentage still.

There are a number of possibilities for expanding that - crossovers between individual training sessions (goalkeeper takes time out of his day to help the strikers, wingers work on crossing while defenders work on zonal marking). To be honest I could live without that, as it could make things very complicated. What I would have is that the number of staff you have would limit the amount of groups you could have doing their own thing. If it's just you and your assistant you can't work with every player individually. This would mean there was a benefit in getting a number of staff in. I would also remove the star ratings system, and have you just judge the coaching staff by their attributes. Most clubs don't have 8 or 9 coaches, and this way you would tailor your staff to the way you were training and the way you want to set up your team - if you are going to focus on having a compact, well drilled unit then get a coach with good tactics and defensive coaching and you will get better results. If you want to focus on fitness spend a good whack on a specialist fitness coach, and so on. Most teams tend not to have a lot of specialists, but that doesn't mean their staff aren't better at coaching certain things and this is reflected in the teams they put out.

******************

That was a bit of an epic, opefully it will generate some debate on the way this works at the moment because I think the current system is out dated and needs a revamp. I'm not saying I've cracked it with the above but it can only help if we get some ideas on the go about how to move the game forward.

I think there are some very interesting ideas here, I really like your ideas for evolving player positions. As an Arsenal fan I have seen this happen with so many players over the past few years. Wenger uses positions to develop aspects of a player’s attributes. He puts young strikers on the wings to develop their all round game, playing in a position improves relevant attributes for that position naturally, you don't train to be a winger until you are ready to play in that position, you play on the wing and you will gradually become a better winger, Football Manager has this aspect the wrong way round.

Good ideas.

That was a fascinating read. Thanks for sharing some really good ideas. To reinforce what you said, I could not live without your positional training system, nor without pre-season training and general training, which you explained magnificently. Star rating system for coaches needs to go, they already have stats :confused:. I would love to debate . . . but I gotta the leave at the moment. Will be back. But that was a brilliant job. FM's training system could really do with an overhaul and they should seriously consider your ideas.

I think what you're suggesting has been the goal of the training module since FM05, it just hasn't been developed to its potential. I definitely agree with the ideas about positions: the change in a players position as he ages really should have been modelled better, we can do it ourselves, but AI managers don't use position retraining even if they regularly play players out of position. The posibility to train more than one position is a good idea.

I fully agree with the positional training bit, especially that part about Giggs. I too have been playing him in central midfield emulating Sir Alex and he's been performing very well for me, and I think that should warrant a "natural" from the game.

As for the training system overhaul, I couldn't agree more. I think training at the moment, whilst complex, is too barely-guided and quite one-dimensional. What would be awesome would be to implement what real managers do in training: set different modules for players to train in. That way you can micro-manage and tailor your training scheme on a daily basis, such as doing how much of this, how much of that a day and ensure the best balance and results possible. It's like CM, yes, but why should that deter SI from implementing the most realistic training system possible?

Let's face it, the truth is, no manager (as far as I'm concerned) goes up to his squad, rubs his hands and announces, "Alright, so this group here will do some light strength, light aerobic, heavy ball control, heavy attacking, light defending, medium shooting and medium set pieces. No goalkeeping." I mean like, it happens, yes, but that's only because the manager has already pre-set what "light", "medium" and "heavy" constitute. I think we should be given a far more realistic and expansive choice of training modules to choose from instead of selecting percentages.

Furthermore, the current system, as allegedly cracked by some users, only affects players on a weekly basis, with the day of the week in question being DIFFERENT for different games. Also, coach stars don't play any significant role (rather their workload does), and for some reason, after a certain number (I think 19 or 20), the slider does not affect training effect anymore, but rather the efficiency. And apparently, the slider at 7 or 8 would be enough to ensure a player "maintains" stats in that area. I cannot confirm these theorems but they do seem backed and credible. With that in mind, I have crafted schedules where the more peripheral stat areas are left at 7 or 8, and so far the players have mainly been increasing stats and not decreasing much. This also implies that with the older bunch of players where you only should seek to maintain stats will have an average workload of light only!

I think this training system, if proven true, is seriously flawed at base realism level and SI should really check it out. On another note, 9.0.3 has made it a good game overall =) keep up the good work!

Great post, and some good ideas.

I agree 100% training needs sorted out asap because really the way it is at the mo if u have 7 star coaches they make no diff than if u had 3 or 4 star.

I'm not really agreeing with you. Or well, at least on the natural positions part.

I'm managing Ajax and there Sulejmani is a 'natural' AMC. My tactics don't need an AMC, so I use him as a winger. At the start of the game, he is 'accomplished' on that position, but, after a couple of seasons behold: Sulejmani is now a natural winger!

Am I the only one who finds this an odd occurrence, or is there some truth to it?

Finds what an odd occurrence?

I'm not really agreeing with you. Or well, at least on the natural positions part.

I'm managing Ajax and there Sulejmani is a 'natural' AMC. My tactics don't need an AMC, so I use him as a winger. At the start of the game, he is 'accomplished' on that position, but, after a couple of seasons behold: Sulejmani is now a natural winger!

Yeah, you can get natural position changes in 09. Pretty sure it has to be like your situation, where a player is playing in an accomplished position for some time.