Important FM16 Training Changes

There has been a number of changes concerning training and how the team’s personality type can rub off onto the younger players for Football Manager 16. This is quite a big change. If you go to your club overview screen then go to the general tab you’ll see this;

On past versions of the game this didn’t have an impact on player development but now that’s changed. So how does it work? It’s basically an automatic effect that is similar to tutoring but not as powerful.

The effects can be good or bad and are limited solely to the attribute related to the personality type. Eg. Professional = Professionalism (hidden attribute), Determination = Determination attribute and so on. So this differs from tutoring because it only works on one attribute, the one listed on the screen highlighted above. The age cut-off depends on the players adaptability (hidden attribute) but the upper age limit is 24. So if the player has a low adaptability attribute then his cut off age will be before 24 by quite a bit.

There is also one more big change to this year’s game that many people will have already noticed and that is the ability to set an individual intensity level for a role focus or individual attribute focus. Instead, this is reflected under “Individual Training Workload”(can be seen on both Training > Individual and Development > Training). This will update as you add/remove further areas of training, eg. an additional focus or a PPM.

Those are the two main changes for this year and both are welcome changes by me, especially the squad personality influence because it means you need to focus on squad building and get players with desirable personality types because if they have bad ones, you don’t want them rubbing off on your youth players do you?!!

Oh one thing I almost missed mentioning was role training. If you want to train a player for a role that isn’t for his natural position then on this year’s game he will automatically start improving his positional rating for that role. Confused? So was we at first but here is an example to give a bit of clarity;

If you had a left back and you wanted him to train the inside forward role because that better suited his attributes, then you can still do that. However depending on which inside forward role you gave him (as you have option for AMR or AML) this would also see him start to become more familiar at either AMR or AML depending which you have selected.

There is a chance though that you might see a player’s positional rating stall or not get any better after a while. I’ve experienced this on my save as I’m three seasons in already. The reason for this can be one of two reasons. The first being the player has reached a point where he needs to be played in the position to improve further. As an example – if the player has no rating at all when you start the training then he might get to unconvincing and then it might not get any further until he actually plays in the position the role training is set for. And the second reason is the player might not be able to add more to his positional abilities, this one is a limit enforced to prevent strange things happening with CA.

None of the above is hear’say it is all confirmed by Seb Wassell from SI games.

EDIT: Also, training now defaults to the player's position in your tactic. This also trains attributes but it is a generic role training which covers the basic group of attributes for the position.

Good info and good to know. It's nice to see SI making subtle improvements to training. I hope one day they link training and tactics even further as it is IRL.

Looking forward to any projects your decide to write about. I'm sure there will be one on player development.

Good info and good to know. It's nice to see SI making subtle improvements to training. I hope one day they link training and tactics even further as it is IRL.

Looking forward to any projects your decide to write about. I'm sure there will be one on player development.

Cheers. I've been writing about my current project on my blog and released a development one today. I will be posting it all here when it's more complete in a few weeks.

Another thing I've noticed on FM16 is players develop slower than on previous versions which is a good thing. It means you don't max your regens PA before they are 20 like in old versions. This is a very welcomed changed because it makes development more long-term.

Thank for the info, Cleon, very interesting.

To clarify, my squad's personality is determined. Does that mean that my players under 24 (depending on their adaptability) will get a minor boost to their determination attribute?

Thank for the info, Cleon, very interesting.

To clarify, my squad's personality is determined. Does that mean that my players under 24 (depending on their adaptability) will get a minor boost to their determination attribute?

There is a chance of that happening yes.

Good stuff as always Cleon, thanks for explaining this.

I guess we need to be a little more aware of CA being spent on position training, although as you point out there seems to be a "cap" on this, and really pleased to note training now involves a longer development period.

There has been a number of changes concerning training and how the team’s personality type can rub off onto the younger players for Football Manager 16. [/i][/b]

One question:

Only on players in the first team or also 2nd team and youth?

thanks

One question:

Only on players in the first team or also 2nd team and youth?

thanks

Any. You get a message in your inbox when a player has been impacted by this. It's not a massive drastic change but it's a subtle change over time.

How definite is your conclusion that Adaptation influences age at which player personality can be moulded?

Because in my research guidelines Adaptability is for a much more specific (though I suppose related) purpose and this confuses things greatly. I'm going to have to re-evaluate half my file.

How definite is your conclusion that Adaptation influences age at which player personality can be moulded?

Because in my research guidelines Adaptability is for a much more specific (though I suppose related) purpose and this confuses things greatly. I'm going to have to re-evaluate half my file.

This is purely for the team influence part and not actual tutoring or anything else but it's 100% accurate and was confirmed by SI. You shouldn't have to adapt your file at all because this bit isn't connected with the work you do as such.

I assign Adaptability ratings for 70-80 players, and base the attribute on factors unrelated to how it is being used in your above example. It is absolutely connected to the work I do.

Not a noticeable part, admittedly, but I like to think I have a bit of pride in my work.

I assign Adaptability ratings for 70-80 players, and base the attribute on factors unrelated to how it is being used in your above example. It is absolutely connected to the work I do.

Not a noticeable part, admittedly, but I like to think I have a bit of pride in my work.

It's not really though. I'd honestly check with SI before making any alterations as you don't know what the calculations are used to get the end result for this. You don't know how SI are factoring the adaptability bit in, they might have some way of calculating it different already that takes into account the work researchers have done. But by changing adaptability on your file based on this will have a dramatic impact elsewhere on the game, not only for this team influence thing but for everything. I think your reaction is a bit over the top, it's nothing to do with your work being wrong or taking pride in it. Any changes you make should be because SI have told you to calculate it differently, which currently they haven't. So I'd honestly check first if you take pride in your work rather than just changing because you think you know better

Cheers for the info, Cleon.

I especially like the new squad influence on youngsters.

I've just noticed this ingame, as one of the random training reports in my inbox from the head of youth development mentioned that "the squad's general character has had a positive effect on Konradsen lately". My squad personality is Very Determined and Konradsen did indeed get a small boost from 14 to 15 Determination in the past couple of months.

Not big, but a nice addition to the game

Cheers for the info, Cleon.

I especially like the new squad influence on youngsters.

I've just noticed this ingame, as one of the random training reports in my inbox from the head of youth development mentioned that "the squad's general character has had a positive effect on Konradsen lately". My squad personality is Very Determined and Konradsen did indeed get a small boost from 14 to 15 Determination in the past couple of months.

Not big, but a nice addition to the game

Long term squad building becomes a little bit more interesting especially if like me, you manage a side who doesn't have many tutors yet have a young squad with a good personality. It's influencing quite a few of my youths atm

Long term squad building becomes a little bit more interesting especially if like me, you manage a side who doesn't have many tutors yet have a young squad with a good personality. It's influencing quite a few of my youths atm

I wouldn't shed a tear if tutoring was removed altogether, to be honest.

That said, I'm curious what sort of effect this has for the AI given that it tends to be more forgiving of bad personalities. If only my laptop could still handle 30 year soak tests...

It's not really though. I'd honestly check with SI before making any alterations as you don't know what the calculations are used to get the end result for this. You don't know how SI are factoring the adaptability bit in, they might have some way of calculating it different already that takes into account the work researchers have done. But by changing adaptability on your file based on this will have a dramatic impact elsewhere on the game, not only for this team influence thing but for everything. I think your reaction is a bit over the top, it's nothing to do with your work being wrong or taking pride in it. Any changes you make should be because SI have told you to calculate it differently, which currently they haven't. So I'd honestly check first if you take pride in your work rather than just changing because you think you know better

This isn't an issue of internal calculations. In the guidelines I was issued Adaptability is defined as the ability of a player to adapt to living in another country (country is in bold). So higher ratings have been assigned to players that have shown ability to learn different languages, spend long periods of their careers in foreign lands, English players trending lower etc. as reflects real-life successes.

This has little-to-nothing to do with how susceptible a player is to peer pressure and influence by teammates.

This isn't an issue of internal calculations. In the guidelines I was issued Adaptability is defined as the ability of a player to adapt to living in another country (country is in bold). So higher ratings have been assigned to players that have shown ability to learn different languages, spend long periods of their careers in foreign lands, English players trending lower etc. as reflects real-life successes.

This has little-to-nothing to do with how susceptible a player is to peer pressure and influence by teammates.

Erm but it all comes back to the same thing no? His ability to adapt and take to things easier than someone with a low adaptability. It's not about peer pressure lol, you're way over thinking things here. I don't see the issue. But like I said if you're that bothered then take it up with SI, this thread isn't really the place for research discussions. So please, any more on the subject and use the correct procedure that you researchers have available to you.

I wouldn't shed a tear if tutoring was removed altogether, to be honest.

That said, I'm curious what sort of effect this has for the AI given that it tends to be more forgiving of bad personalities. If only my laptop could still handle 30 year soak tests...

I'm speculating here but maybe this is the first step to the removal or tutoring in future versions? At least, how we currently know tutoring in the current form. It's a lot more realistic having players 'pick' things up on their own and put the extra work in. Hopefully this is a step in the right direction and we can see a revamp on tutoring, hidden attributes and the way training in general is linked to a player and more importantly, a bigger tactical link between training and tactics.

Wishful thinking eh?!

Erm but it all comes back to the same thing no? His ability to adapt and take to things easier than someone with a low adaptability. It's not about peer pressure lol, you're way over thinking things here. I don't see the issue. But like I said if you're that bothered then take it up with SI, this thread isn't really the place for research discussions. So please, any more on the subject and use the correct procedure that you researchers have available to you.

They are both issues of 'adaptability' as a general term, but Adaptability the attribute has been assigned a specific definition that does not fit this use. If you can't see how conflicts arise from this I don't know what to say.

They are both issues of 'adaptability' as a general term, but Adaptability the attribute has been assigned a specific definition that does not fit this use. If you can't see how conflicts arise from this I don't know what to say.

Like I said take the discussion elsewhere please rather than moaning in here about it. Go and actually see if you are over reacting or not. Go and speak to SI or your head researcher etc. I'm not being funny but it really has no place in here

A big thanks for this post. I think things could have been made a lot clearer by SI.

I'm speculating here but maybe this is the first step to the removal or tutoring in future versions? At least, how we currently know tutoring in the current form. It's a lot more realistic having players 'pick' things up on their own and put the extra work in. Hopefully this is a step in the right direction and we can see a revamp on tutoring, hidden attributes and the way training in general is linked to a player and more importantly, a bigger tactical link between training and tactics.

Wishful thinking eh?!

Yeah, I still find the training part of FM difficult to get into, even though player development is something that interests me more than tactics in real life. There's just not enough of an immersion factor, and it still feels a bit too much like you're just calibrating a big machine at the player factory. Hopefully, this is one of many changes to come.

I have been wondering exactly how that was working ever since I got a 'training report' that mentioned the teams personality was having a good effect on player xxxx. Since I hadn't seen that before I figured it represented something new in the game, it's pretty much what I guessed but it is good to know how it actually works.

As always, great info - thanks again!

Cheers. I've been writing about my current project on my blog and released a development one today. I will be posting it all here when it's more complete in a few weeks.

Another thing I've noticed on FM16 is players develop slower than on previous versions which is a good thing. It means you don't max your regens PA before they are 20 like in old versions. This is a very welcomed changed because it makes development more long-term.

This point is probably the best thing about it, ending up with a team of 20 year old world beaters and not a ounce of senior experience in the team. Space bar for 10 years then look at the next best youths. All an exageration but still.

There has been a number of changes concerning training and how the team’s personality type can rub off onto the younger players for Football Manager 16. This is quite a big change. If you go to your club overview screen then go to the general tab you’ll see this;

On past versions of the game this didn’t have an impact on player development but now that’s changed. So how does it work? It’s basically an automatic effect that is similar to tutoring but not as powerful.

The effects can be good or bad and are limited solely to the attribute related to the personality type. Eg. Professional = Professionalism (hidden attribute), Determination = Determination attribute and so on. So this differs from tutoring because it only works on one attribute, the one listed on the screen highlighted above. The age cut-off depends on the players adaptability (hidden attribute) but the upper age limit is 24. So if the player has a low adaptability attribute then his cut off age will be before 24 by quite a bit.

There is also one more big change to this year’s game that many people will have already noticed and that is the ability to set an individual intensity level for a role focus or individual attribute focus. Instead, this is reflected under “Individual Training Workload”(can be seen on both Training > Individual and Development > Training). This will update as you add/remove further areas of training, eg. an additional focus or a PPM.

Those are the two main changes for this year and both are welcome changes by me, especially the squad personality influence because it means you need to focus on squad building and get players with desirable personality types because if they have bad ones, you don’t want them rubbing off on your youth players do you?!!

Oh one thing I almost missed mentioning was role training. If you want to train a player for a role that isn’t for his natural position then on this year’s game he will automatically start improving his positional rating for that role. Confused? So was we at first but here is an example to give a bit of clarity;

If you had a left back and you wanted him to train the inside forward role because that better suited his attributes, then you can still do that. However depending on which inside forward role you gave him (as you have option for AMR or AML) this would also see him start to become more familiar at either AMR or AML depending which you have selected.

There is a chance though that you might see a player’s positional rating stall or not get any better after a while. I’ve experienced this on my save as I’m three seasons in already. The reason for this can be one of two reasons. The first being the player has reached a point where he needs to be played in the position to improve further. As an example – if the player has no rating at all when you start the training then he might get to unconvincing and then it might not get any further until he actually plays in the position the role training is set for. And the second reason is the player might not be able to add more to his positional abilities, this one is a limit enforced to prevent strange things happening with CA.

None of the above is hear’say it is all confirmed by Seb Wassell from SI games.

EDIT: Also, training now defaults to the player's position in your tactic. This also trains attributes but it is a generic role training which covers the basic group of attributes for the position.

Hi Cleon could you point me in the direction of how to set up training on FM16. I have not played this game in a while so I am very confused on how to set up training on this version. I need help on setting up pre season training and training during the season. Also any tips on setting individual training will be good.

With the new 'additional focus' training, If you have a player training in a role then double up with the additional focus on something that is already covered in that training, is that being redundant? Is that going to improve that attribute quicker? Example would be a defender on any DC training, then putting the additional focus on marking.

good read thanks cleon

in fact i had to read it twice to make sure i understood....or maybe shouldnt read the forum at silly times of the morning tired

Quick question - Are the complaints about individual training focus something to be ignored, much like complaints about training workload have always been? Eg, I'm training one of my CM's to have better dribbling, but he's complaining that he thinks the training is not effective. Should I just stick with that or how should I interpret that really in FM16?

Complaints come from poor personalities. Ignore them or get the player tutored by more professional players and they'll stop the complaints.

Hi Cleon could you point me in the direction of how to set up training on FM16. I have not played this game in a while so I am very confused on how to set up training on this version. I need help on setting up pre season training and training during the season. Also any tips on setting individual training will be good.

All of this still applies http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/380395-Ajax-When-Real-Life-Meets-Football-Manager-FM14

With the new 'additional focus' training, If you have a player training in a role then double up with the additional focus on something that is already covered in that training, is that being redundant? Is that going to improve that attribute quicker? Example would be a defender on any DC training, then putting the additional focus on marking.

It's not redundant as then it would be a pretty pointless feature wouldn't it? It just means their is more focus on that particular attribute so it has a greater chance of changing in the short term.

There is still some unanswered question regarding the changes.

1. Does training facilities and coach play a huge part? and staff determination/ professionalism as well?

2. Does player form affects player growth. Logically speaking. If they are playing poorly, how can they improve their game?

3. Does hidden PA still limits player growth? i hope it is more dynamic for youngsters

There is still some unanswered question regarding the changes.

1. Does training facilities and coach play a huge part? and staff determination/ professionalism as well?

2. Does player form affects player growth. Logically speaking. If they are playing poorly, how can they improve their game?

3. Does hidden PA still limits player growth? i hope it is more dynamic for youngsters

What unanswered questions regarding the changes? You've asked questions that aren't linked to the changes bar the first question.

1. For what? The squad personality influence? If so no the clue is in the name squad personality, not staff personality

2. Game time is important not what the player does/doesn't do.

3. Of course it limits it, hence why it's called potential ability. It's not changed and I doubt we will see dynamic youths anytime soon because that would require a full restructure which seems like a lot of work in the short term. Long term though I expect to see it change at some point.

This was on the second page so I'll give it a bump so people know the exact training changes this year. As a lot of people think other stuff has been changed. If something is not listed in here then it still works as in previous versions.

I don't know if this is of any interest, but I'll just briefly describe an experiment involving training I'm conducting to examine the behaviour of the game outside the area that SI test.

What I've done is create a club in the lowest (8th) tier of a Scottish league (Sangue Blu's edited file, over in the Editors' Hideaway).

The whole playing squad is 14-15 year old lads with CA1 PA200. They're all in the database as Scottish plus a few English and Welsh boys; a few I nudged their age down a year but I didn't touch any attribute, just altering their CA/PA. I did rig their contracts so they're all on full-time 25-year deals (+ leave at the end of their contract) to stop them being sold off in the future. There are 32 players, ensuring all get adequate playing time.

Now here's the rub - to this professional and rich club I've got perfect training facilities and a full complement of CA200 coaching staff. My aim is to see how long it takes for the boys to reach a level when they can compete with men and how their attributes develop over time.

I'm only a couple of months in but already I can see areas SI could address. Many of the lads start of with attributes such as strength, stamina and jumping 1 - quite rightly, and in pre-season are below 50% condition by half time. Yet as pre-season draws to a close there's a sudden leap and most of them can cope with 90 minutes. This is even more incredible when I mention that the tactic I'm using is basically Klopp's Gegenpressing - I was expecting a long learning-curve before they had the stamina to make that effective.

By this point a few CAs have increased to 5 already and the average is 3. Even with these increases I would expect us to be pulverised from the outset but we're winning our games against fellow L8 opposition.

I know SI aren't in the business of 'fixing' L8 fan-created leagues, but I wonder if they could tweak the single-digit CAs down to make them far less good.

I don't know if this is of any interest, but I'll just briefly describe an experiment involving training I'm conducting to examine the behaviour of the game outside the area that SI test.

What I've done is create a club in the lowest (8th) tier of a Scottish league (Sangue Blu's edited file, over in the Editors' Hideaway).

The whole playing squad is 14-15 year old lads with CA1 PA200. They're all in the database as Scottish plus a few English and Welsh boys; a few I nudged their age down a year but I didn't touch any attribute, just altering their CA/PA. I did rig their contracts so they're all on full-time 25-year deals (+ leave at the end of their contract) to stop them being sold off in the future. There are 32 players, ensuring all get adequate playing time.

Now here's the rub - to this professional and rich club I've got perfect training facilities and a full complement of CA200 coaching staff. My aim is to see how long it takes for the boys to reach a level when they can compete with men and how their attributes develop over time.

I'm only a couple of months in but already I can see areas SI could address. Many of the lads start of with attributes such as strength, stamina and jumping 1 - quite rightly, and in pre-season are below 50% condition by half time. Yet as pre-season draws to a close there's a sudden leap and most of them can cope with 90 minutes. This is even more incredible when I mention that the tactic I'm using is basically Klopp's Gegenpressing - I was expecting a long learning-curve before they had the stamina to make that effective.

By this point a few CAs have increased to 5 already and the average is 3. Even with these increases I would expect us to be pulverised from the outset but we're winning our games against fellow L8 opposition.

I know SI aren't in the business of 'fixing' L8 fan-created leagues, but I wonder if they could tweak the single-digit CAs down to make them far less good.

It already is toned down but what you've done is create something extreme that would never exist in the first place. By doing that then you have to expect weird results because in a game world this scenario would never happens.

Yes, I fully appreciate that and I don't intend to post further about my savegame. I'm just saying that it might give insights into areas such as crossing that appear to be over-cooked in FM16. Also it might give some insight into rate of youth development.

There is a chance though that you might see a player’s positional rating stall or not get any better after a while. I’ve experienced this on my save as I’m three seasons in already. The reason for this can be one of two reasons. The first being the player has reached a point where he needs to be played in the position to improve further. As an example – if the player has no rating at all when you start the training then he might get to unconvincing and then it might not get any further until he actually plays in the position the role training is set for. And the second reason is the player might not be able to add more to his positional abilities, this one is a limit enforced to prevent strange things happening with CA.

I've noticed this too.

But it looks inconsistent or buggy.

In the demo I managed to get Coutinho at Liverpool to Natural at CM in the first season.

In a new save after release, he's still at 15/20 after 1.5 years.

Cleon,

Why do you always manage Santos?

I know it probably isn't "always", but it seems to be pretty often.

Just curiosity.

Cleon,

Why do you always manage Santos?

I know it probably isn't "always", but it seems to be pretty often.

Just curiosity.

Yeah you're right it's not always. I don't see why it seems to bother you though that it's often? I manage lots of teams. But Santos is a team I actually support and seeing as European football on FM is dull then why not?

I know this isn't directly a "training change" but quite clearly it takes longer to build up tactical familiarity now. What should I do training wise to speed this up as much as possible? I've put myself in a crap position as I took over a team midway through pre-season, and after 2 friendlies I decided the setup I was using doesn't suit us well and want to try something else. So now I've got one single friendly to go and zero tactical familiarity...

I know this isn't directly a "training change" but quite clearly it takes longer to build up tactical familiarity now. What should I do training wise to speed this up as much as possible? I've put myself in a crap position as I took over a team midway through pre-season, and after 2 friendlies I decided the setup I was using doesn't suit us well and want to try something else. So now I've got one single friendly to go and zero tactical familiarity...

Tactic familiarity has not changed and it doesn't take any longer than previous versions of the game.

The only way to get tactical familiarity to rise it by setting match training to 'tactics'. If you alter the training schedule slider bar and put it to the very left this makes training 50% split between general and match training. That learns it faster. But in order for it to rise you need games. Any new signings, tactical shape changes or TI's will all slow the progress down.

Tactic familiarity has not changed and it doesn't take any longer than previous versions of the game.

The only way to get tactical familiarity to rise it by setting match training to 'tactics'. If you alter the training schedule slider bar and put it to the very left this makes training 50% split between general and match training. That learns it faster. But in order for it to rise you need games. Any new signings, tactical shape changes or TI's will all slow the progress down.

I think many of us disagree, it certainly DOES take longer to gain tactic familiarity compared to previous FM versions.

I think many of us disagree, it certainly DOES take longer to gain tactic familiarity compared to previous FM versions.

But it's not changed this is a fact . It still takes around 13 friendlies for it to be fully fluid the exact same as FM14 and 15. If it's not happening for you and others then it's something you are doing wrong. The way tactic familiarity is gained and the rate at which has not changed.

Tactic familiarity has not changed and it doesn't take any longer than previous versions of the game.

The only way to get tactical familiarity to rise it by setting match training to 'tactics'. If you alter the training schedule slider bar and put it to the very left this makes training 50% split between general and match training. That learns it faster. But in order for it to rise you need games. Any new signings, tactical shape changes or TI's will all slow the progress down.

Thanks. Annoyingly, the game doesn't let me change the slider, it's stuck at the middle, even though I have full control of the training (ie, I've not given it to the assman in the staff responsibilities). I think this is because we're a semi-professional club and don't train every day.

I'm speculating here but maybe this is the first step to the removal or tutoring in future versions? At least, how we currently know tutoring in the current form. It's a lot more realistic having players 'pick' things up on their own and put the extra work in. Hopefully this is a step in the right direction and we can see a revamp on tutoring, hidden attributes and the way training in general is linked to a player and more importantly, a bigger tactical link between training and tactics.

Wishful thinking eh?!

One thing ive always wanted to see in the game is personal player growth in PPMs or specific skill sets (Free Kicks, Corners, Throws, Pens etc). For example, i get a training report that says "Player X has been putting in extra training to work on his penalty taking". You see a lot of players stay behind after sessions to work on specific skills, even gym work to develop speed/strength etc. This could possibly be instigated by stats like ambition, determination etc. Footedness is another one.

Yeah you're right it's not always. I don't see why it seems to bother you though that it's often? I manage lots of teams. But Santos is a team I actually support and seeing as European football on FM is dull then why not?

No, it doesn't bother me. I asked you because I'm brazilian and was wondering if you were too.

And I too agree that the Brazilian League is one of the coolest to play, because it's much more balanced.

No, it doesn't bother me. I asked you because I'm brazilian and was wondering if you were too.

And I too agree that the Brazilian League is one of the coolest to play, because it's much more balanced.

I'm just a Brazilian football fan

I like it on FM because depending which States you are in and how successful you are, it can be an 84 game season and that's tough to deal with no matter how good you are. Playing a game every 2-3 days is demanding and makes it quite the challenge even when you have a great squad

I'm just a Brazilian football fan

I like it on FM because depending which States you are in and how successful you are, it can be an 84 game season and that's tough to deal with no matter how good you are. Playing a game every 2-3 days is demanding and makes it quite the challenge even when you have a great squad

Nice! It's been very good years to be a Santos supporter. From 2002 until nowadays.

The day after tomorrow they play the cup final against Palmeiras, and I'm betting they'll claim it.

I'm a São Paulo fan myself.

The hardest State C-ship is São Paulo State, as you have 4 big teams and 3 or 4 medium ones that can be dangerous.

And you are probably getting a glance at how awful the football calendar is here. If you manage to reach the final of SP State and the 2nd round of Libertadores, you have like 8 decisive matches in 18 or 20 days. It's the most dificult time of the year.

I always end up trying to have 16-18 starter quality players and manage the stars' minutes if needed (with lots of complaints from my players not having enough playing time). It's pretty tough.

I have a question about the distribution of the general - individual training (not match preparation)

if general training is set to low intensity ,the rest goes to individual right ?

lets say i have a DR and choose the CWB role training , in some players the individual player workload is light

if i add lets say quickness addition focus ,becomes medium the ind.work,

is it 50%-50% from the individual time ? (CWB-quickness)

and if i want the individual workload to become heavy , i must set the general training to medium ,but then lesser time goes to individual training.

I mean the best way is to leave it to role even if the workload is light ?

I hope you understood the question (sorry for my English)

Thanx in advance

If playing 2 games a week, is it worth losing 2 training days a week if rest after a match is ticked?

Does it help improve players condition instead of actual fitness training?

I have a question about the distribution of the general - individual training (not match preparation)

if general training is set to low intensity ,the rest goes to individual right ?

lets say i have a DR and choose the CWB role training , in some players the individual player workload is light

if i add lets say quickness addition focus ,becomes medium the ind.work,

is it 50%-50% from the individual time ? (CWB-quickness)

and if i want the individual workload to become heavy , i must set the general training to medium ,but then lesser time goes to individual training.

I mean the best way is to leave it to role even if the workload is light ?

I hope you understood the question (sorry for my English)

Thanx in advance

If I understand your question correctly then yes its a 50%-50% split

If playing 2 games a week, is it worth losing 2 training days a week if rest after a match is ticked?

Does it help improve players condition instead of actual fitness training?

That's far too much rest time. One day or rest after a match is more than enough. Any more rest time and it won't help unless you have a really busy period of games in quick succession. Players need to train in order for condition, players need to play in order for match fitness. So giving players more rest than is needed is always a bad idea because it doesn't actually improve fitness levels.