bolulu Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 I know this has been thrown around as a topic before but I am still finding myself getting dizzy with the constant meeting suggestions of "move him up" or "move him down". It really is a pain. He's not a key player, he should be a 1st teamer; not a back-up, he should be a rotation option... Jesus!!!! Does anyone really think this is important enough to appear for about three different players at every single team meeting? Spare me the "realism" argument. This is getting seriously tedious in my opinion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wwfan Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 Agree. It should perhaps happen three times in a season. 1: End of pre-season training: To help determine the quality of your squad 2: January 1st: To help determine any mid-season transfer targets 3: End of season: To overview for your summer transfer strategy The exception should be when youth players are, in the coach's mind, making the step up to 1st team status. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
daddyrichie Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 Agreed wwfan. It does kinda get annoying when I have for example 15 messages in my backroom staff meetings and at least 6 or 7 of them are "move him to such and such" and so on. 3 times a year would be more than enough although I feel mid-December would be more ideal than Jan 1st so it gives you 2 weeks or so to start scouting the players and negotiating rather than once it's open and other teams could be poaching these players before you've been told what position needs sorting Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wwfan Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 3 times a year would be more than enough although I feel mid-December would be more ideal than Jan 1st so it gives you 2 weeks or so to start scouting the players and negotiating rather than once it's open and other teams could be poaching these players before you've been told what position needs sorting Good call. Alternatively, the user could have a choice as to what type of backroom meeting to call. 1: Squad analysis: overview the squad statuses, strengths and weaknesses in the squad 2: Training analysis: overview the current training performance and possible PPM options 3: Backroom analysis: overview the quality and amount of the backroom team 4: Scouting analysis: overview potential targets 5: General meeting: whatever the backroom staff wants to discuss Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BiggusD Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 It is ridiculous that they suggest that a player I promised would be a key player when I signed him should be set to squad rotation after a few weeks. If anyone followed such advice they would seriously upset the player! The advice should be removed entirely from the game until the advice they give is actually informed and sound. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
telV7 Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 If you want a further giggle, I have raised this but have to re-up the file http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/298090-Assistant-manager-encouraged-by... I get things like this every week sometimes a few times a week. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbobBRFC Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 Good call. Alternatively, the user could have a choice as to what type of backroom meeting to call.1: Squad analysis: overview the squad statuses, strengths and weaknesses in the squad 2: Training analysis: overview the current training performance and possible PPM options 3: Backroom analysis: overview the quality and amount of the backroom team 4: Scouting analysis: overview potential targets 5: General meeting: whatever the backroom staff wants to discuss I do like that idea somethings they say are very tedious. Especially when they recommend a staff member who is a lot worse then any of your current staff members. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CityAndColour Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 Especially when you click ten times to get through all the scouting targets, and then you accidentally click once more and bang, your star striker is upset because you downgraded him to rotation by accident. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cleon Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 Good call. Alternatively, the user could have a choice as to what type of backroom meeting to call.1: Squad analysis: overview the squad statuses, strengths and weaknesses in the squad 2: Training analysis: overview the current training performance and possible PPM options 3: Backroom analysis: overview the quality and amount of the backroom team 4: Scouting analysis: overview potential targets 5: General meeting: whatever the backroom staff wants to discuss I'm liking this idea:thup: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
x42bn6 Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 I don't think squad status really should matter. It is not like one day you turn round and stick a piece of paper on your player's forehead indicating he is a squad player. Firstly, players don't usually don't just "turn into another rank" in an instant - it's gradual. A player who is getting worse and worse as he ages in a squad that is getting better will gradually fall from first-teamer to rotation to backup. Secondly, for more sharp changes, there would probably need to be communication with that player. A manager should be able to go up to the player and give them the good news or bad news. I would split the squad status into two - one that is for the manager and board, as the club's expectations (i.e. Nicklas Bendtner is a squad player at Arsenal); and one that is negotiated with the player during contract talks or discussions (i.e. Nicklas Bendtner expects to be treated as Arsenal's most important player). Usually, they will roughly match - if they don't then the player might become unhappy (depending on professionalism, ego, etc.). The former will factor in things like how much the board will allow you to spend on wages, while the latter should be managed by the manager. And because few changes are sharp, I would make it a sliding scale rather than 6-7 possible descriptions. There could be many different orthogonal views, too, such as "Nicklas Bendtner expects to be a first-team striker, but will make the odd appearance on the wing" (positional role) or "Paul Pogba expects to be with the reserves, but will be in the first-team within a year" (longer-term expectations). This way, you don't get silliness like decreasing a magical, invisible squad status bar behind the scenes, and the player somehow manages to discover this magical slider and gets upset that you decreased it, when in reality you may not change how you view, treat and play that player - and this is the thing that actually matters. I'd also argue that this should apply for the first-team/reserves split as well, where getting put into the reserves should not be an explicit demotion to the reserves - it's just "cosmetic" to the user to stick someone in the reserves (possibly for a few weeks if he is recovering from a serious injury). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bolulu Posted February 27, 2012 Author Share Posted February 27, 2012 Last time I posted a criticism on this issue I got blasted. It seems like we are all agreed this "status change" advice is superfluous for the number of times it appears & actually flawed in a lot of the recommendations. In an ideal world I would like to see an SI employee, or a moderator tellinf us that this issue is at least under review for action. Please....? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.