add more jobs within the clubs... = more realistic !!

ok right now as the game stands the is .....

Ass Man, 1st team coach, coach, youth coach, fitness coach, physio, scout

i would like to see SI do a more realistic club set up. and its not at hard really. time consuming, yes but not hard.....

--first all make the dir of football job dynamic........

--add a head fitness coach .......just like in real life

--add a head reserve coach

--add a head youth coach

--add a club doctor

--add a club nutritionist...... a good nutritionist might add 1 point to players natural fitness or on those lines

--add a head scout...... just like liverpool or chelsea

--add a head physio

also

--add head goalkeeper coach

--add defensive coach

--add attacking coach

--add a club psychologist........a good psychologist will improve players mental stats

thats all

thanks

i think you need to elaborate filcom...what would you like to see added/ what other jobs do you want?

it's like started a post saying fm2012 needs more features.... and thats it.

More importantly - how would these new jobs improve gameplay or manager experience?

What Boycey said. You cant just come and say they need to make it more realistic. Suggest something ffs.

There are also gk coaches in case you forgot.

I'm struggling to think of any other positions.

Groundsman?

Stadium Manager?

Janitor?

sorry i pushed ENTER before i was finished !!!

ok right now as the game stands the is .....

--first all make the dir of football job dynamic........

--add a head fitness coach .......just like in real life

--add a head reserve coach

--add a head youth coach

--add a club doctor

--add a club nutritionist...... a good nutritionist might add 1 point to players natural fitness or on those lines

--add a head scout...... just like liverpool or chelsea

--add a head physio

also

--add head goalkeeper coach

--add defensive coach

--add attacking coach

--add a club psychologist........a good psychologist will improve players mental stats

At Man United? Or Barcelona? Great.

I can't see this happening at Dorchester or Yeovil.

read it again ....apologies

Just adding the new jobs will make little difference. What needs to be done is an overhaul of the areas that they are in charge of. For example, Head youth coach/academy manager should seriously affect the youth players that come through - get a coach with good technical coaching skills and you'll get skillful players, get a coach with good fitness coaching skills and you'll get strong, fast players, but maybe less 'talented'. By appointing a Head Scout, you should be able to delegate some of the scouting to him, so you should maybe be able to instruct him to find players of a certain type - e.g. find me the bst young players, find me a first choice left back, and so on. He'll then coordinate your scouts and present you a list of suitable players as the reports come in.

ok right now as the game stands the is .....

Ass Man, 1st team coach, coach, youth coach, fitness coach, physio, scout

i would like to see SI do a more realistic club set up. and its not at hard really. time consuming, yes but not hard.....

--first all make the dir of football job dynamic........

--add a head fitness coach .......just like in real life

--add a head reserve coach

--add a head youth coach

--add a club doctor

--add a club nutritionist...... a good nutritionist might add 1 point to players natural fitness or on those lines

--add a head scout...... just like liverpool or chelsea

--add a head physio

also

--add head goalkeeper coach

--add defensive coach

--add attacking coach

--add a club psychologist........a good psychologist will improve players mental stats

thats all

thanks

Nothing in this list is necessary or improving the game whatsoever. Head physio? Physios are merely formal in the game anyway. Nutrition - that's just crazy. Psychologist - I see how you could connect players morale with him (e.g. he can improve morale or avoid complacency), but this function is solved through team talks at the moment. Attacking or defensive coach - nothing that you can't do through coach assignments.

Head of... (anything) - what's the point? How is head on GK coach any different than regular GK coach? What effect he could have to the team or player that regular GK coach couldn't?

I can't see any point in adding these fancy positions without any effect to the game.

i didnt say anything about the physics of the game or the physics of training .... it just adds realism because thats the point of FM isn't it? chelsea, arsenal, man u, city, liverpool etc ..... all have head Goal keeping coaches ...... why add it in the game? because it adds realism !

All have a head of physio..... and Harry Redknapp famously said you cant find white bread at spurs because...the nutritionist wont allow it !!!! why add a nutritionist in the game? because it adds realism !

Les ferdinand is not just a coach at spurs he's their Attacking coach... to a point that whenever he is on tv he is introduced as spurs Attacking coach Les ferdinand......why add Attacking or defensive coach in the game? because it adds realism

i dont apologize for wanting FM to be more realistic......

in this case there is noting wrong with adding bells and whistles..........

This could actually be an okay idea...

...however:

Why is there an equals sign on in your title?

Unless you are implying that "more realistic" is "add more jobs within clubs" then this is just silly.

It reminds me my last time I switched jobs. I agreed terms and after couple of days after I had started our secretary wanted to order a business cards for new employee (me), so my boss came to my room to ask 'what exactly you want your position to be... 'specialist' or 'manager' or 'director' (of my respective field of work)?". The point is, neither of us never discussed the title of position, we concentrated on job itself.

You can call your cleaning lady 'dust removal specialist' or the guy who's driving over football field with lawn mower 'manager of maintenance machinery division', your GK coach 'head GK coach' etc. The point is that it doesn't matter when job is the same.

Good point Draakon:

For example, my Honved side has a side in the second division. If they were to get relegated I'd get rather annoyed. So I've passed the job of managing them around through my backroom staff last 2 seasons. I've now signed a new assitant, one Nigel Gibbs to do the job permanently though as they were all terrible and I had to save the club last season and early this season.

I think this is something that really is missing in FM.. a way to really make the bigger clubs differentiate from the smaller clubs.. f.eks. as someone said.. this is highly likely in teams like Yeovil or Danish 2. division teams.. but bigger teams have 100's of people in all sorts of functions. Why not add them? (I'm not talking financial positions and such, but merely football related positions..)

As an example is has become very popular to hire psychologists.. so why should this NOT be in FM? because Yeovil doesnt have one?.. surely it should be added to FM to add to realism. The same would apply to many other job positions.. including nutritionists

i didnt say anything about the physics of the game or the physics of training .... it just adds realism because thats the point of FM isn't it? chelsea, arsenal, man u, city, liverpool etc ..... all have head Goal keeping coaches ...... why add it in the game? because it adds realism !

All have a head of physio..... and Harry Redknapp famously said you cant find white bread at spurs because...the nutritionist wont allow it !!!! why add a nutritionist in the game? because it adds realism !

Les ferdinand is not just a coach at spurs he's their Attacking coach... to a point that whenever he is on tv he is introduced as spurs Attacking coach Les ferdinand......why add Attacking or defensive coach in the game? because it adds realism

i dont apologize for wanting FM to be more realistic......

Attacking coaches are already in the game as are defensive, GK, fitness & general ones.

Don't see the point of this at all to be honest.

Besides, the AI can't handle the staff we have... I mean how many teams have you seen with a GK coach, fit coach, 1 other regular coach and then 8 physios? Really?

Fine the way it is.

Some of these are a bit unnecessary but I think psychologists should be added to the game. I know that at top clubs psychologists are very important and I'm sure many clubs going down the leagues make some use of them. The difference could be larger clubs having a full-time psychologist and going down the leagues having them part-time or even "freelance".

And they would have a large effect on the game regarding morale etc.

Some of these are a bit unnecessary but I think psychologists should be added to the game. I know that at top clubs psychologists are very important and I'm sure many clubs going down the leagues make some use of them. The difference could be larger clubs having a full-time psychologist and going down the leagues having them part-time or even "freelance".

And they would have a large effect on the game regarding morale etc.

This is just ridiculous. Just because teams hire psychologists doesnt mean they are effective at all. Show me studies that have evidence of these people actually being effective. The clubs hire them because they imagine they are effective and because if they dont they will appear negligent to their fans and board. Also, the game will over-power them and further distort the game with peripheral nonsense.

This is just ridiculous. Just because teams hire psychologists doesnt mean they are effective at all. Show me studies that have evidence of these people actually being effective. The clubs hire them because they imagine they are effective and because if they dont they will appear negligent to their fans and board. Also, the game will over-power them and further distort the game with peripheral nonsense.

http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?q=psychology&hl=en&btnG=Search&as_sdt=1%2C5&as_sdtp=on

http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?q=psychology+football&hl=en&btnG=Search&as_sdt=1%2C5&as_sdtp=on

http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?hl=en&q=psychology+sport&btnG=Search&as_sdt=0%2C5&as_ylo=&as_vis=0

http://www.thefa.com/GetIntoFootball/FALearning/NewsAndFeatures/2009/FA_Psychology_for_Football.aspx

http://performance.fourfourtwo.com/experts/bill-beswick

http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?q=psychology&hl=en&btnG=Search&as_sdt=1%2C5&as_sdtp=on

http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?q=psychology+football&hl=en&btnG=Search&as_sdt=1%2C5&as_sdtp=on

http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?hl=en&q=psychology+sport&btnG=Search&as_sdt=0%2C5&as_ylo=&as_vis=0

http://www.thefa.com/GetIntoFootball/FALearning/NewsAndFeatures/2009/FA_Psychology_for_Football.aspx

http://performance.fourfourtwo.com/experts/bill-beswick

These are not empirical peer reviewed evidence. Its just anecdotal and basically meaningless.

These are not empirical peer reviewed evidence. Its just anecdotal and basically meaningless.

In contrast, the lowest level of acceptance of rough play was found in the opposite subgroup of high-task/low-ego. The findings support the importance of creating a task-involving climate in sports.

http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a713668963

Task orientation was linked to the beliefs that effort, team play, and parental support contribute to achievement in soccer. An increase in skilled performance over the season (as appraised by the coach) corresponded to a stronger task orientation and the beliefs that soccer success stems from hard work and having supportive parents.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0838.1999.tb00257.x/abstract

Players also reported using imagery more for its motivation function than its cognitive function. In general, the elite athletes reported employing more imagery than non-elite athletes regardless of the function imagery served.

http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a789559255

A series of two-way analyses of variance with one repeated measure revealed significant interactions for cognitive anxiety intensity, somatic anxiety intensity, and somatic anxiety direction. This study provided further support for the "matching hypotheses" in that a compatible treatment proved most effective in reducing the targeted anxiety

http://www.getcited.org/pub/103341300

Results indicated that GEQ scores related to Vigor, lending support to the notion that being part of a cohesive team is associated with positive mood states. Relationships showed that Vigor and AGTT were associated with perceiving performance to be successful. Depressed mood was shown to be associated with a poor perception of performance. We suggest that future research should investigate the efficacy of applied interventions designed to improve cohesion and mood.

http://www.athleticinsight.com/Vol4Iss3/MoodPDF.pdf

Seriously - psychology in sports is well-known and applied all over the world. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to therefore deduce having a psychologist at the club is a good thing.

Maybe, but I think there are lots of other areas that need attention first.

I think the OP is more after something like this: http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/194821-Chain-of-Command-Responsibilities-Hands-on-Approach?highlight=head+scout

Seriously - psychology in sports is well-known and applied all over the world. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to therefore deduce having a psychologist at the club is a good thing.

You missed my larger point. While psychology MIGHT work in sport, its not really known how and would be impossible to model accurately inside the game. Im willing to listen to any ideas on how it might be theoretically introduced however.

You missed my larger point. While psychology MIGHT work in sport

It works. Hope this helps.

its not really known how

It is. Psychology is a valid scientific discipline.

and would be impossible to model accurately inside the game.

Not true.

Im willing to listen to any ideas on how it might be theoretically introduced however.

And demanding peer-reviewed works on football psychology isn't going to help.

It works. Hope this helps.

It doesnt.

It is. Psychology is a valid scientific discipline.

No, its not. Its results on the whole are not observable and repeatable. Neurology isnt psychology. We know too little about the way the brain functions for psychology to be truly scientific.

Not true.

Prove me wrong.

And demanding peer-reviewed works on football psychology isn't going to help.

Its not going to hurt; especially when SI start trying to program things into the game that they dont understand.

It doesnt.

So what about all those links I've put up?

There is plenty of scientific evidence out there that suggests psychology simply works. It's the science of the brain. Psychologists are employed in sport all over the world, not just football - for example, Tiger Woods had a psychologist a while back (before his troubles) - ever wonder why Woods looks so confident on the golf course?

No, its not. Its results on the whole are not observable and repeatable. Neurology isnt psychology. We know too little about the way the brain functions for psychology to be truly scientific.

See those links I've put up?

And since when did I mention neurology?

We don't understand how the brain works fully - but it doesn't stop us deriving results based upon it. Just because something is a black box doesn't mean it can't be used.

Prove me wrong.

I can't prove a negative.

But for a start, you could have a psychologist whose purpose is to monitor the stress levels of players. He could notice that Arsenal wet their pants when holding a one-goal lead, while Manchester United don't go to pieces, for example. He could be responsible for improving the mentality of players, and reduce the effects of stress.

Its not going to hurt; especially when SI start trying to program things into the game that they dont understand.

They don't need peer-reviewed journals on psychology, just like they don't have to read books on fluid mechanics to model the ball to a sensible degree of accuracy, nor laws on radiation to ensure that the pitch is the correct colour, reflecting the exact wavelength reflected back from the Sun...

And demanding peer-reviewed works on football psychology isn't going to help.

Why not? I hope you realise that with this one statement you are putting yourself level with the homeopaths, climate deniers and other quacks who knowing that they have no proof for their position, and if properly looked into, have a lot of evidence against their position, so spend all their energies either stopping people from looking at their assertions or suing those that show how bad those assertions are.

If you have no proper peer reviewed studies, your arguement holds as much water currently as the flat earth theory.

Good point Draakon:

For example, my Honved side has a side in the second division. If they were to get relegated I'd get rather annoyed. So I've passed the job of managing them around through my backroom staff last 2 seasons. I've now signed a new assitant, one Nigel Gibbs to do the job permanently though as they were all terrible and I had to save the club last season and early this season.

*worships*

Gibbsy taught me everything I know about man-management and motivating... (in game of course) He was my assistant in FM09 and we were an unstoppable team... (not just Swindon but me and Gibbsy too )

I wonder if club exclusive psychologists actually exist? If so, I will spend my next three years studying to become one.

I'd just like to comment on the earlier posts regarding psychology, I wouldn't call myself an expert in the field but I am fairly well versed in the current condition of the science.

If psychology were to be modeled in the game we would only need a few numbers (for a start) - how it affects the stats/calculations in the game, how long it takes and how well it works.

The argument regarding whether psychology is helpful is two-way. Theoretically, in the cognitive sense, I would agree with Bababui, since it is true that we don't know how the brain works in order to know exactly what areas we are targeting. Practically, in the behavioral sense I'd have to agree with x42bn6, as we don't need to know what the internal processes are to know what output we get from the input. In sports, output is what we are looking for, so it is unnecessary to look much deeper than the surface. Which is not saying that we can just do whatever we want as long as they work harder, there are real mathematical models and proven systems that modify behavior exactly as we wish. But we're talking mainly about the morale boosting effects of psychology?

I am of the opinion that modern psychology, especially the more abstract therapy type of service, has minimal real effect besides from the placebo effect of speaking with an expert, and seeing someone who has experience with communicating with sports people and will talk to you in a neutral position. The confidentiality guarantee is also a big help. I'm saying the morale boosting effect is there, but judging by how some players behave, I believe even I could do a better job than whoever currently does it. In x42bn6's example of stress on the players, I know exactly what a proper psychologist SHOULD do, but the current generation of psychologist would probably just end up talking to the players about it, and then at the end of the session just tell them not to be so stressed or whatever. Some more caring ones may try to find out the reason for it, but I don't think that will be of any help.

Apparently, some forms of psychotherapy have a close 40% chance of success (guess which ones those are). Medical companies wouldn't dare put out a medicine with that kind of success rate. Think of it this way: currently, clinical psychologists do not use any calculations, barely ever provide any kind of proven regime to help a patient, and are under no obligation to show the exact extent of the improvement of the patient after treatment. As an avid fan and believer of the science of psychology, I am saddened to say that we should be suspicious of the current array of therapy on offer.

And that is why I wouldn't want psychologists in the game, at least until SI can model player psychology properly, which in the current state is horrendous.

Why not? I hope you realise that with this one statement you are putting yourself level with the homeopaths, climate deniers and other quacks who knowing that they have no proof for their position, and if properly looked into, have a lot of evidence against their position, so spend all their energies either stopping people from looking at their assertions or suing those that show how bad those assertions are.

If you have no proper peer reviewed studies, your arguement holds as much water currently as the flat earth theory.

The good news is that I've pulled peer-reviewed papers on psychology in sports and football out, so this point is moot.

Psychology (properly-applied) quite frankly works. It does get flak because it's less objective than "normal" sciences, as it is difficult to quantify things like emotions, but there are measureable properties such as quality of life or in the case of football, results on the pitch.

It is just unreasonable to demand peer-reviewed papers on a subject that is universally-accepted as "it works", especially on an Internet forum.

I wonder if club exclusive psychologists actually exist? If so, I will spend my next three years studying to become one.

I'd just like to comment on the earlier posts regarding psychology, I wouldn't call myself an expert in the field but I am fairly well versed in the current condition of the science.

If psychology were to be modeled in the game we would only need a few numbers (for a start) - how it affects the stats/calculations in the game, how long it takes and how well it works.

The argument regarding whether psychology is helpful is two-way. Theoretically, in the cognitive sense, I would agree with Bababui, since it is true that we don't know how the brain works in order to know exactly what areas we are targeting. Practically, in the behavioral sense I'd have to agree with x42bn6, as we don't need to know what the internal processes are to know what output we get from the input. In sports, output is what we are looking for, so it is unnecessary to look much deeper than the surface. Which is not saying that we can just do whatever we want as long as they work harder, there are real mathematical models and proven systems that modify behavior exactly as we wish. But we're talking mainly about the morale boosting effects of psychology?

I am of the opinion that modern psychology, especially the more abstract therapy type of service, has minimal real effect besides from the placebo effect of speaking with an expert, and seeing someone who has experience with communicating with sports people and will talk to you in a neutral position. The confidentiality guarantee is also a big help. I'm saying the morale boosting effect is there, but judging by how some players behave, I believe even I could do a better job than whoever currently does it. In x42bn6's example of stress on the players, I know exactly what a proper psychologist SHOULD do, but the current generation of psychologist would probably just end up talking to the players about it, and then at the end of the session just tell them not to be so stressed or whatever. Some more caring ones may try to find out the reason for it, but I don't think that will be of any help.

Apparently, some forms of psychotherapy have a close 40% chance of success (guess which ones those are). Medical companies wouldn't dare put out a medicine with that kind of success rate. Think of it this way: currently, clinical psychologists do not use any calculations, barely ever provide any kind of proven regime to help a patient, and are under no obligation to show the exact extent of the improvement of the patient after treatment. As an avid fan and believer of the science of psychology, I am saddened to say that we should be suspicious of the current array of therapy on offer.

And that is why I wouldn't want psychologists in the game, at least until SI can model player psychology properly, which in the current state is horrendous.

Generally agree that some disciplines within psychology have been... Less than enthusiastic at applying the scientific method, let's just say.

However, a trained psychologist will know what questions to ask and things to look out for.

While it is clearly not as axiomatic and robust as most sciences, there are plenty of studies showing that psychology has its uses.

A psychologist within the context of this game would be one that would help players focus or reduce pressure, for example.

It doesnt.

No, its not. Its results on the whole are not observable and repeatable. Neurology isnt psychology. We know too little about the way the brain functions for psychology to be truly scientific.

Prove me wrong.

Its not going to hurt; especially when SI start trying to program things into the game that they dont understand.

Psychology is BS? Oh dear me, you don't seem to have any idea of what you are talking about. Let's just start with team talks and end there. Psychology has been a valid science for a long time and with good reason, it's employed in just about anything you can imagine.

If the game becomes anymore 'realistic' it could lose some more of it's fanbase. I just think it's a bad idea as the micro management side of the game is spiralling out of control, for me at least.

You have a point there, but i think it's more of a flaw of execution than the flaw of being a feature, a simple on/off toggle for many things or a way to automate them(DECENTLY, everything that is automated right now is just at a level where you need to manage things yourself) it could work. I suppose it works both ways in the end, it could be great for some people, and really bad for others, Head Coaches and Head Scouts wouldn't hurt but anything else would be interesting.

I suppose it all depends on how SI includes everything(if they decide to include any ideas from this thread).

ok right now as the game stands the is .....

Ass Man, 1st team coach, coach, youth coach, fitness coach, physio, scout

i would like to see SI do a more realistic club set up. and its not at hard really. time consuming, yes but not hard.....

--first all make the dir of football job dynamic........

--add a head fitness coach .......just like in real life

--add a head reserve coach

--add a head youth coach

--add a club doctor

--add a club nutritionist...... a good nutritionist might add 1 point to players natural fitness or on those lines

--add a head scout...... just like liverpool or chelsea

--add a head physio

also

--add head goalkeeper coach

--add defensive coach

--add attacking coach

--add a club psychologist........a good psychologist will improve players mental stats

thats all

thanks

why do you want stuff that clubs don't get ion real life attacking coaches come under coach youi just search for 1 with great attacking stats. again a reserve coach like in real life is a coach you have that you let take your reserves.

i didnt say anything about the physics of the game or the physics of training .... it just adds realism because thats the point of FM isn't it? chelsea, arsenal, man u, city, liverpool etc ..... all have head Goal keeping coaches ...... why add it in the game? because it adds realism !

All have a head of physio..... and Harry Redknapp famously said you cant find white bread at spurs because...the nutritionist wont allow it !!!! why add a nutritionist in the game? because it adds realism !

Les ferdinand is not just a coach at spurs he's their Attacking coach... to a point that whenever he is on tv he is introduced as spurs Attacking coach Les ferdinand......why add Attacking or defensive coach in the game? because it adds realism

i dont apologize for wanting FM to be more realistic......

if you cared to look at the training in the game you will see the coach with good attacking stat coaches players attack nothing else

I think the OP is more after something like this: http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/194821-Chain-of-Command-Responsibilities-Hands-on-Approach?highlight=head+scout

Good link, I think if something like this could be put into the game it would be really good. I like the idea that you give instructions to the head of the department - what the conversation could look like

Head Scout - Manager

M - Hi (insert name), I would like to make you head scout.

HS - Wow, thanks for the chance could you give me a little more information on the job?

M - Yes, you will be in total control of 12 scouts, you can hire and fire ones as you seem fit/

(or) You will have 12 scouts working under you.

HS - And what would you like me to concentrate on?

M - I would like to to search the world/EU/America/Asia for the hottest young talent

(or) I would like you to search for players already in our country from the lower leagues who will be able to do a job

etc

etc

The same could work for attacking coaches and defending coaches etc.

I like the idea of a Head Scout. Would save me from having to micromanage scout assignments to the Youth Internationals, etc.

I like the idea of a Head Scout. Would save me from having to micromanage scout assignments to the Youth Internationals, etc.

I have a Head Scout... he doesn't have the title but I always have my 'best' scout available, he never leaves the country unless he is scouting a player abroad. His reports are given greater credence than those of my other scouts and I rely on him to be accurate in his assessment as I take his advice on signings regularly. Almost all of the OP, tbf, can be 'created' in the game now, it's just unnecessary fluff to include it as standard...