Why are team talks still ridiculously crap?

I'm 2-0 up in the cup final and I told my players not to get complacent, which is a reasonable thing to say considering that we're playing against Man City who've won the league 6 times in a row.

But nope, it's totally unreasonable to tell them to stay focused. They get CONFUSED and DEMOTIVATED by my outrageous request.

Needless to say I lost the match with 3 goals conceded in the last 10 minutes, presumably because Jack Butland had completely lost the motivation to continue playing football after my team talk.

Great programming, SI (and on that note fix the match engine, especially the goals coming right after changing you tactics glitch)

Whether its reasonable or not depends on your pre-match media comments, your pre-match team talk and the personalities of your players.

On this occasion you made a wrong choice it seems.

Losing three goals in the last ten minutes suggests the opposition changed tactics and took risks, once they got one goal it gave them confidence while your team lost it. What did you do to counter the opposition changes?

I'm 2-0 up in the cup final and I told my players not to get complacent, which is a reasonable thing to say considering that we're playing against Man City who've won the league 6 times in a row.

But nope, it's totally unreasonable to tell them to stay focused. They get CONFUSED and DEMOTIVATED by my outrageous request.

Needless to say I lost the match with 3 goals conceded in the last 10 minutes, presumably because Jack Butland had completely lost the motivation to continue playing football after my team talk.

Great programming, SI (and on that note fix the match engine, especially the goals coming right after changing you tactics glitch)

No they're not. You have no idea how to talk to your squad.

Did your team deserve to be 2-0 up or was it a fluke? Also, what team are you and what season are you in?

There's also no glitch that causes goals to be scored right after you change tactics, so stop spreading false information.

There really is no excuse for half the players to be confused and demotivated by the simple instruction that they don't get complacent against the champions of England, whatever my pre-match talk was, unless you think that telling players not to get complacent in that scenario in real life would cause them to become confused and demotivated. It's completely unrealistic. It's the cup final.

There's obviously a science that you guys have got it down to, but it doesn't change the fact that it's unrealistic. City didn't have a chance in the first half (the only highlight was them hitting the bar from a corner, another thing which probably isn't a bug although it happens all the time and is incredibly unrealistic and a waste of time).

I did what I usually do with progressive changes from counter to defensive to contain with defensive instruction and substitutions.

I'm Charlton in 2019/2020.

The glitch maybe doesn't cause the goals, but the frequency that the opposition scores goals directly after I exit the tactics screen compared to the frequency I score seems to suggest it's a bug. SI have previously said that they were looking into something which sounds similar to my complaint.

The glitch maybe doesn't cause the goals, but the frequency that the opposition scores goals directly after I exit the tactics screen compared to the frequency I score seems to suggest it's a bug. SI have previously said that they were looking into something which sounds similar to my complaint.

Are you going to the tactics screen because you have spotted something that needs fixing? If so, surely those will be the times when you are most vulnerable to conceding?

There really is no excuse for half the players to be confused and demotivated by the simple instruction that they don't get complacent against the champions of England, whatever my pre-match talk was, unless you think that telling players not to get complacent in that scenario in real life would cause them to become confused and demotivated. It's completely unrealistic. It's the cup final.

There's obviously a science that you guys have got it down to, but it doesn't change the fact that it's unrealistic. City didn't have a chance in the first half (the only highlight was them hitting the bar from a corner, another thing which probably isn't a bug although it happens all the time and is incredibly unrealistic and a waste of time).

I did what I usually do with progressive changes from counter to defensive to contain with defensive instruction and substitutions.

I'm Charlton in 2019/2020

Okay, so you were obviously playing well to be 2-0 up against the champions of England. If they were doing that well, why would you tell them not to get complacent? You're essentially telling them they're doing just enough and the slightest bit of over-confidence will see them lose. Of course they'll be confused. They're confused because they did play well.

The glitch maybe doesn't cause the goals, but the frequency that the opposition scores goals directly after I exit the tactics screen compared to the frequency I score seems to suggest it's a bug. SI have previously said that they were looking into something which sounds similar to my complaint.

I'm aware of that glitch and in that case it was just a glitch as all it did was skip one highlight. It didn't cause any goals. You're implying that exiting the tactics screen somehow results in a goal against you, which is complete nonsense. I know it can look like it when you're watching key highlights, but that's obvious as you have a high chance of any highlight being a goal then.

Are you going to the tactics screen because you have spotted something that needs fixing? If so, surely those will be the times when you are most vulnerable to conceding?

Most of the time it's just me switching to a more defensive tactic since we're going into the last 20 minutes of the match or making subs.

I'm willing to accept that it might just be a case of selective memory, but I'm sure the ratio for those types of goals is about 10:1 in the opposition's favour.

I'm willing to accept that it might just be a case of selective memory, but I'm sure the ratio for those types of goals is about 10:1 in the opposition's favour.

It's either selective memory or your defensive tactic needs improvement.

To the OP- the team talks work well when you understand what they mean. To that end, as with some other items, I think SI could redesign the teamtalks so that the meaning is more intuitive. What I would have said in your situation, depending on how you played is either "keep going out there" or "pleased with how things are going" whatever the specific wording is. I do agree with you however, that the wording of the team talk choices are not really clear contextually.

The 'don't get complacent' wording quite frankly has to be changed. In the FM universe it stands for 'you're leading but not playing well'. Which basically implies that they are complacent. You can't get complacent if you already are complacent. It does not make any sense so no wonder people don't understand the FM context.

Okay, so you were obviously playing well to be 2-0 up against the champions of England. If they were doing that well, why would you tell them not to get complacent? You're essentially telling them they're doing just enough and the slightest bit of over-confidence will see them lose. Of course they'll be confused. They're confused because they did play well.

I'd have thought I was telling them that the slightest bit of overconfidence could see them get punished because they're playing against the team who've just won 6 titles on the trot, not that they'd definitely lose. Most of them reacted well to it. 4 or 5, including my goalkeeper, were confused and demotivated.

I'm not sure why they're getting demotivated in an FA Cup final when none of them have won a proper trophy in their lives.

Good to see other people agree with rewording/adding more team talks. Great point, Äktsjon.

I'd have thought I was telling them that the slightest bit of overconfidence could see them get punished because they're playing against the team who've just won 6 titles on the trot, not that they'd definitely lose. Most of them reacted well to it. 4 or 5, including my goalkeeper, were confused and demotivated.

I'm not sure why they're getting demotivated in an FA Cup final when none of them have won a proper trophy in their lives.

Good to see other people agree with rewording/adding more team talks. Great point, Äktsjon.

It could do with better wording, but you're admitting that you meant "the slightest bit of overconfidence could see them get punished". That is why they were confused. I'm going to also guess and say that the 4 or 5 that got confused were the best 4 or 5 performers as well?

What did your last match team talk feedback say? Did you get feedback as to why they were confused?

It could do with better wording, but you're admitting that you meant "the slightest bit of overconfidence could see them get punished". That is why they were confused.

Why would that be confusing? It's a reminder that a lead can slip easily against a very good team. A perfectly reasonable thing to say. The reason they get confused is because it's taken to mean that they have been performing badly despite being in the lead. But that's not what the team talk actually says. On the other hand, if they actually are not playing well but have the lead the intuitive thing to do would be telling them exactly that. But that gets them all sad and confused as well in a 'oh noes, how can you say that when we're 4-3 up' kind of way. There's no reason for it to be misleading like this.

Why would that be confusing? It's a reminder that a lead can slip easily against a very good team. A perfectly reasonable thing to say. The reason they get confused is because it's taken to mean that they have been performing badly despite being in the lead. But that's not what the team talk actually says. On the other hand, if they actually are not playing well but have the lead the intuitive thing to do would be telling them exactly that. But that gets them all sad and confused as well in a 'oh noes, how can you say that when we're 4-3 up' kind of way. There's no reason for it to be misleading like this.

I don't buy this at all. Man City (according to the OP) didn't have a chance in the 1st half, so he was playing very well and dominating. How would this lead slip very easily if he's playing that well? Also there's more than one "don't be complacent" team talk. It would also depend on which one he chose.

I just tested this. Played against a weak team in a friendly. 4 - 0 up at half-time. Told the team "You might have a solid lead, but that could all change if your performance levels drop", which was a silly talk to give since I have a 4 goal lead and they're a weaker team. 10 players had a positive reaction and only 1 lost confidence.

Final score? 7 - 1

If the OP gave up 3 goals in the last 10 minutes, it's not team talks that did it, it's his tactics.

If the OP gave up 3 goals in the last 10 minutes, it's not team talks that did it, it's his tactics.

Probably worth pointing out that SI have stated that team talks only affect players for the first 15 minutes at the start of each half.

After that their mental state is affected by what happens on the pitch.

4-0 up at half time... keep it up.

second half either concede or nothing of note happens.

might try the performance level ones though, no fun when you want some GD.

I still want to know exactly what team talk the OP used and what the last match team talk feedback was.

4-0 up at half time... keep it up.

second half either concede or nothing of note happens.

might try the performance level ones though, no fun when you want some GD.

Again, do you think a team talk alone will get you more goals? If the opposition gave up four goals in the first half, they'll do damage control and be a lot more defensive in the second half. Change your approach.

I don't buy this at all. Man City (according to the OP) didn't have a chance in the 1st half, so he was playing very well and dominating. How would this lead slip very easily if he's playing that well?

It would slip easily if they got complacent. Which you are warning them against. There's absolutely nothing about this that would confuse anyone. This statement does in no way imply that they haven't played well, in fact it does not say anything about their performance at all.

I just played another match. 2-0 up at half-time without playing well. Goals from a DFK and a penalty. So I tell the team "Don't get complacent, despite the score" which sounds like what the OP told his team.

5x gained focus, 3x seemed motivated, 1x had no reaction and 2x seemed confused and demotivated. So I continue the match.

After the game, I check "Last Match Team Talk Feedback". The 2 confused players had this: Expected credit for the performance and felt past feedback had been harsh

The others had this: Seemed determined to respond or Appreciated being challenged by the manager

So the OP's team obviously didn't like being challenged to keep up performance levels and expected praise. It's all down to personality types and knowing your squad.

But you can't give credit for performance AND warn against complacency. It's one or the other and that one for some reason is taken as the opposite of the other. It's not in any way, shape or form harsh to demand focus. It's common sense.

That's the thing with FM team talks. In reality a manager isn't introduced at half time with a drum roll to bellow out DON'T GET COMPLACENT before disappearing into the cold night while lights fade and curtains are lowered. They can actually qualify their statements and analyse performances individually. In FM you just have that blanket statement so you have to be able to take it for what it is, literally.

But you can't give credit for performance AND warn against complacency. It's one or the other and that one for some reason is taken as the opposite of the other. It's not in any way, shape or form harsh to demand focus. It's common sense.

It is common sense to demand focus, but not everyone will want to hear the manager bang on about keeping focus and performance levels up. Some would want acknowledgement for the how well they've performed. Some players actually perform better when praised. Different personalities. Get to know your squad.

It is common sense to demand focus, but not everyone will want to hear the manager bang on about keeping focus and performance levels up. Some would want acknowledgement for the how well they've performed. Some players actually perform better when praised. Different personalities. Get to know your squad.

Well then it would make sense to praise their performance but still demand focus. It has to stop being a one or the other thing, that's all.

Well then it would make sense to praise their performance but still demand focus. It has to stop being a one or the other thing, that's all.

It would be a mess. You have two opposite ends and you're trying to mix them up.

Praising performances will cause some players to (A) lose focus and others to (B) gain confidence to perform even better.

Demanding focus (don't be complacent) will cause those players to either (A) gain focus because they want to be challenged or (B) lose confidence because they wanted to be praised.

You're going to cancel both effects out. If you have a squad mixed with these opposite personalities, then say something else rather or don't say anything at all.

It's not two opposite ends for god's sake! Two opposite ends would be 'your performance is absolutely laughable' and 'you're brilliant, congratulations'. Demanding focus and saying the performance level has been good so far is not mutually exclusive in any way. If it cancels the effects out, fine. It would still make more sense than players feeling harshly treated when the manager warns them against complacency.

I couldn't have made it any clearer. I'm out then.

Surely it can only make sense to be able to say something along the lines of brilliant job so far, but we can't afford to give these guys a sniff otherwise they'll get right back into it. That amounts to well done but don't get complacent and I'm sure this will have been delivered many a time by managers at half time.

I get the impression that there is a layer of complexity behind the scenes in this game in terms of personality that is not adequately represented or accessible by the UI. This is what leads to confusion with some people. The team talks could definitely do with expanding to help with this - I can't see don't get complacent as a wholly negative thing at half time because to be able to get complacent you have to have been doing well. It comes as part of what the word means in that context. Although I usually let my assistant's advice drive my team talks now (due to getting it wrong so many times) I would have always used the complacent chat in terms of great job - keep it up to the end as that is what makes sense to me.

The very fact that there is such disagreeing over what each talk means should suggest that there is not enough detail in the description.

The very fact that there is such disagreeing over what each talk means should suggest that there is not enough detail in the description.

There isn't enough detail in the description, no. However after 1 team talk feedback it's quite clear what it means.

There isn't enough detail in the description, no. However after 1 team talk feedback it's quite clear what it means.

Perhaps, although I still find myself puzzled by some of the reactions interactions manage to elicit from players.

Luckily for me in team talks my assistant is usually bang on the money...

Perhaps, although I still find myself puzzled by some of the reactions interactions manage to elicit from players.

Luckily for me in team talks my assistant is usually bang on the money...

Feedback has seen a big improvement in FM14, imo. In-match feedback is a lot clearer and even when it's not always clear why a player reacts the way he does, the Last Match Team Talk Feedback clears it up.

The team talk description itself could benefit from being slightly longer, to make it clearer what you say. Even if you do have the wrong understanding because of the short descriptions, it should only be a mistake you make once. The feedback on these talks is good enough to give you the information.

I wonder how many people A) know that section/button/feedback exists and B) how many actually use it. It's maybe slightly too hidden away.

Feedback has seen a big improvement in FM14, imo. In-match feedback is a lot clearer and even when it's not always clear why a player reacts the way he does, the Last Match Team Talk Feedback clears it up.

The team talk description itself could benefit from being slightly longer, to make it clearer what you say. Even if you do have the wrong understanding because of the short descriptions, it should only be a mistake you make once. The feedback on these talks is good enough to give you the information.

I wonder how many people A) know that section/button/feedback exists and B) how many actually use it. It's maybe slightly too hidden away.

I'd say it's far too hidden away. It used to be on the front section in FM12 iirc. Why it's been hidden back I dont know, but it really needs to be a lot more prominent

I'd say it's far too hidden away. It used to be on the front section in FM12 iirc. Why it's been hidden back I dont know, but it really needs to be a lot more prominent

A way of un-hiding (is that a word?) it would be to incorporate it with your assistant's advice or backroom staff advice. In could form part of, hopefully, a more helpful system in terms of tactic building and squad management. Fingers crossed.

From what I've experienced myself the confused reaction after using that team talk usually comes if you are a major underdog and somehow find yourself outplaying goliath. The players expected credit, praise or encouragement.

A second thing I'd add is that "Don't get complacent" is somewhat risky to use depending on your players and the situation as it adds pressure to the players. If you have some players that doesn't deal with pressure they are likely to get nervous/very nervous body language. And if you concede the first goal you'll have a bunch of shaky legs out there. The complacent comment is something you should reserve for when you are 1 goal up against a poor team.

It would be a mess. You have two opposite ends and you're trying to mix them up.

Praising performances will cause some players to (A) lose focus and others to (B) gain confidence to perform even better.

Demanding focus (don't be complacent) will cause those players to either (A) gain focus because they want to be challenged or (B) lose confidence because they wanted to be praised.

You're going to cancel both effects out. If you have a squad mixed with these opposite personalities, then say something else rather or don't say anything at all.

"You've played really well in the first half, we have been the better team. Stay focused, don't get complacent and keep doing what you were doing"

It's not that hard.

You have that option with individual talk though, effectively micromanaging the feedback to suit the players.

In example I have three players in my 1st eleven that doesn't deal well with pressure. Whenever I'm critical of the team, or when they have nervous body language or seem deep in thought, I usually encourage those three with a passionate tone. I have 4 players who is great at dealing with pressure and whenever I'm praising the team or they are looking confident I use an assertive tone with them and tell them to do better.

I still really don't see the issue with the "complacent" team talk. Other than, perhaps, people thinking complacent has a softer meaning than it actually does.

From Merriam Webster, the US publishing dictionary of choice: complacent - marked by self-satisfaction especially when accompanied by unawareness of actual dangers or deficiencies

The OP has to ask himself why he thinks his players would be feeling self-satisfied and unaware of danger in a cup final against the champions of England!

Team talks used to frustrate me as well. However, the solution that I found to work was to imagine you have a 3-year old. Or a small puppy. Then imagine your entire squad is comprised of these 3-year-olds or small puppies.

Now...how would you treat them based on the game situation? It seems that the more you treat your players like infants, the better the response back is. Not sure if that is what FM was going for, but the results have been great for me.

or maybe you could get to know your player's personalities and actually treat them like a manager would...

imo, they should have two complacency options:

1. You're doing well, but the opponent is still manchester ****** united, so watch your six.

2. Don't be cocky, you're only 1-0 up against Reading.

yea spent 35 of 45 minutes 1-0 at spurs, creating nothing .... come in at half time, 1-2 up.. assistant advice... praise the performance but thell them they can do better.

what?

assistant advice... praise the performance but thell them they can do better.

what?

"You have played well so far but there is till room for improvement" or "Things are going well but I know you are capable of even better"

How do you not understand that?

or maybe you could get to know your player's personalities and actually treat them like a manager would...

Why? The results I get are good. What's the point of changing if it gets me the desired response?

I wonder what Brendan Rogers' team-talk was last night........

"Don't over-commit, make sure you win the game" - or words to that effect (as has since said himself). Which he then might have helped by becoming defensively more solid (extra CB or 2 DMCs). Ah well.

Referring to the original post; warning against complacency when 2-0 up against Man City wouldn't have much effect regardless of the team you are managing (with their current reputation/players). It's the wrong choice of team-talk in this context.

The fact they are who they are means they are very likely to take more risks as the game progresses with the scoreline at 2-0. Man United under Ferguson are the obvious comparison here, they didn't fear anyone and gradually applied more pressure, with more overlaps, and more attacking players, late on in games they weren't winning.

As has already been mentioned above, you should be praising your team for taking the lead against a stronger team.

thats exactly my point: you need to know the 'personality' of your players.. know the opponent's tactic inside out.... know what to say and when.. are you joking?

if anyone plays fm without a thorough knowledge of football they have no chance...

basically spend your life in a game which is supposed to be a 'game'!!!

It's probably more relevant to have decent grasp on motivational psychology (for groups).

It takes a few clicks to find out what result you should be expecting against a particular team; based on their league standing, reputation and general squad values.

It could also be made clearer by SI, I'd agree on that.

thats exactly my point: you need to know the 'personality' of your players.. know the opponent's tactic inside out.... know what to say and when.. are you joking?

if anyone plays fm without a thorough knowledge of football they have no chance...

basically spend your life in a game which is supposed to be a 'game'!!!

No its more akin to a simulation than a game.

FM has always been designed to appeal more to those users who like the longer/deeper strategy type games than those who want a quick fix arcade game.

Have a decent understanding of football, some idea how to manage & motivate people and some common sense will see you do reasonably well.

thats exactly my point: you need to know the 'personality' of your players.. know the opponent's tactic inside out.... know what to say and when.. are you joking?

if anyone plays fm without a thorough knowledge of football they have no chance...

basically spend your life in a game which is supposed to be a 'game'!!!

I cringe when I read comments like these. What you're saying simply isn't true. At all.

"Knowing the personality of your players" isn't very complicated. The OP made a mistake by giving a teamtalk that his players didn't appreciate. Fine. ONE visit to Last Match Team Talk Feedback would show him why they weren't impressed and he won't ever have to make that mistake again. People are over-complicating team talks. Maybe because they're trying to "game" it to get "green" responses all the time, I don't know.

You also don't need to know your opponent's tactic inside out. I have a game on "Full FM" where I watch entire matches and react to the opposition (spend my life in the game apparently) and I'm doing fairly well. I have another save on the Vita where I don't care what the opposition does at all. I set up a tactic that plays to the strengths of my team and I breeze through matches, watching only Extended highlights. I'm 3rd with a mid-table lower league club.

You do need some knowledge of football and tactics, if you're going to build your own. Isn't that obvious? This is a football management sim! Don't care about tactics? Let your assistant handle tactics and matches. Use instant result. Download a tactic. You have plenty of options.

If it's still too complicated, try FMH.

Play FM classic where there are no team talks

Is there a bug when playing as Liverpool? Brendan Rogers believes there might be - something about giving up a 3 goal lead against Crystal Palace .....