Squad Gelling.

[SFraser]

I have been thinking about this particular aspect of the game for a while, because the consensus on what it means makes a whole lot of sense, but doesn't actually fit in with my game experience and never really has.

The consensus is that Gelling means experience with a tactic, that the longer a team plays with a certain tactic the more used to the tactic they become and the better at it they become. Changes to tactics and new players etc. reduces Gelling and the team becomes less capable at the tactic. Am I on the right track here?

That certainly seems to fit 90% of what a manager will see in his gameplay, and it is a totally logical assumption, but as I said before it doesn't completely fit what I have seen and I am not convinced by this explanation of Gelling. Indeed I have my own, slightly different interpretation of Gelling. I think my explanation might help to explain some of the quirks or discrepancies people might see in their own squad Gelling, and shed some light on the actual working of this quite important aspect of a team.

Two things stand out from my current save that make me question the consensus on Squad Gelling:

1: My tactical consistency in season 2 is 8, and my squad Gelling hit maximum during the time I was most experimental with players and tactics. Prior to this I stuck with a very similar starting 11 and very similar tactics. Recently I have been rotating like a madman, and experimenting with completely different formations based on the same basic back four only.

2: When I started my save at my current team I remember watching a perfectly timed run being met with a perfectly timed pass, but unfortunately the ball and the player were going in different directions. The passer thought the run was going somewhere else. Now, at maximum Gelling, there is no question of playing perfectly timed passes to perfectly timed runs but in the wrong direction. It just doesn't happen.

These two issues lead me to believe that Squad Gelling has very little to do with tactics, although tactical upheaval does matter, but is actually all about players gaining experience of playing with other players. Gelling is not a tactical issue at all. Gelling is all about how much the players at your club are used to and experienced at playing with each other. High Gelling does not equal improved ability at X tactic, it means improved ability at playing with X player. Likewise wholesale changes to tactics with a highly Gelled squad will have much more limited impact than expected, because it is about player to player ME behaviour.

In simple terms I think Gelling means improved playing ability between players, improved passing, improved line holding, improved runs when X player has the ball, improved relationships in midfield, just better all round behaviour between players. A much greater understanding of each other, if you will. The implications of this are quite important.

1: Squad Rotation if under a certain size will actually improve Squad Gelling.

2: Regular playing time with other players rather than regular formations will improve player-to-player behaviour/understanding.

3: Gelled squads can transition with much more ease to new formations and playstyles because the actual player-to-player behaviour is superior.

4: Gelled squads can cope with injuries/suspensions/rotation so much easier.

5: Poorly Gelled squads not only have inferior on-pitch relationships, but will suffer even more from changes because players do not understand each other and do not relate to each other others actions.

I think there is a slight, subtle misunderstanding of Gelling in FM in general, but that has important consequences because of what Gelling might actually mean. I do think it means player-to-player on pitch behaviour and not consistent tactics. More playing time between players, more accuracy in moves and movement and action and events and so on.

[Jenko_EFC]

Was queried before in your other thread about this and personally I rotate tactics, personnel too quite alot. So basically it is similar to teamwork then in the context of how well teams play as teams and also ties in with an idea I believe you came up with in the How will the TC develop thread where you said about Player X passes to Player Y but plays through balls to Player Z etc. If so then rotating players may not be the best thing to do but rotating tactics may help if it inevitabely gets you the win. Rotating players would be interesting as they may not 'gel' but as long as you get multi-functional players who can play different roles then you could use the same XI with only a few minor changes week in week out but major tactical changes whereas vice-versa may lead to players not gelling?

[Xennaz]

High Gelling does not equal improved ability at X tactic, it means improved ability at playing with X player.

In simple terms I think Gelling means improved playing ability between players

1: Squad Rotation if under a certain size will actually improve Squad Gelling.

2: Regular playing time with other players rather than regular formations will improve player-to-player behaviour/understanding.

3: Gelled squads can transition with much more ease to new formations and playstyles because the actual player-to-player behaviour is superior.

4: Gelled squads can cope with injuries/suspensions/rotation so much easier.

5: Poorly Gelled squads not only have inferior on-pitch relationships, but will suffer even more from changes because players do not understand each other and do not relate to each other others actions.

Always thought this, myself. I personally also have episodes of tactical instability, most recently when I was trying to incorporate a Libero and Sweeper Keeper in tried and tested tactical frameworks.

I think you're definitely hitting close to the mark, if not spot on in terms of what gelling is.

[Simply... Awesome!]

1: My tactical consistency in season 2 is 8, and my squad Gelling hit maximum during the time I was most experimental with players and tactics.

.

Can you kindly tell us how you know that squad gelling hit a maximum? Was it based on feedback by the ass man's "Assistance Advice" on "Get Team Talk Feedback" page, a personal opinion, or some hidden attribute, or something else?

[Finknottle]

SFraser, If I can use the comparison with real life coaching. More than once I have been asked to assist with a team that has had horrendous results. My thoughts are that you can take the worst performing team and improve them. They will not become winners, as such but will perform a lot better than previously. I do this by asking all of the team what they think is their best position and why. This is then tried out and the results noted. I next, suggest to them what I think is their best position and why. From there I get to having a formation that best fits their situation. Based upon the player's abilities. I then work on a tactics best suited. Normally this is a defensive based tactic. This is because it is easier to destoy than to create. After about 7-10 matches you will see an improvement in the way your team play. Their results will still be defeats but the scorelines will come down and you will see that the team is playing together better. The team that you started with is still the same one. To get them to start winning you now have to introduce better players. That is the start of the really hard but very enjoyable work. So, you can see that there is some similarity with real life and FM.

[heathxxx]

One example I can think of from the top of my head, is the assistant manager feedback during games Simply... Awesome!

The assistant will provide quite important information about how well (or not) players are gelling into the squad.

He'll advise if the language barrier is a problem, If his personality has yet to "gel" with that of the rest of the team, plus tactical gelling advice such as "player X isn't used to closing down as much" for example.

I think that gelling is twofold. Players adapting and fitting into the overall squad personality. Players adapting and fitting into the overall tactical mentality. I do think that fitting into the squad personality is arguably the more important of those two areas though.

Such is why, I always try to sign players with similar personality traits.

Language and communication is another important factor. Ideally, we would hope that an overseas player has a high adaptability attribute. Although this is hidden, there are enough indicators in scout and coach reports telling us if they're likely settle or not. I do believe that higher determination, professionalism, ambition, pressure can help override low adaptability, if you have other squad members who speak the same language and can help them settle in.

So overall, this is entirely why I devote a lot of time, attention to detail, when squad building. Many problems aren't always tactical. I usually find that a squad of similar personalities and character traits, will adapt more quickly to many variances in tactical instructions.

In short, if everyone is on the same wavelength, it's much easier to communicate tactical instructions.

I think a lot of people will overlook personalities when squad building, in favour of only considering playing attributes. Such is why, I believe, we see many posts from people who can't understand why "player x" with wonderful attributes, fails to perform. If a wonderfully attributed player isn't performing, his personality and "gelling" with that of the squad, is most likely the biggest cause of any problems.

[ham_aka_stam]

Yeah, I've always been told that rotation = bad gelling. However my best results have every come from times when I have rotated the squad to the maximum, and done a bit of a Ferguson with my formations, adapting them to opponents play-styles and line-ups.

Also similar to Ferguson, the only player who played the vast majority of games, was Patrice Evra.

I did not have one problem with gelling.

This season I've tried to play my 1st team as much as possible, and now players are popping up with disagreements left, right and centre.

Rooney dislikes Obertan and my Italian Wonderkid Regen, Rio dislikes Jonny Evans, and Carrick dislikes Stevan Jovetic.

[DocSander]

SFraser,

Would you think that this 'Gelling' is one number for the entire squad, or a separate number for each player, or rather separate numbers for each player-player combination?

The latter would most resemble real life in my opinion. F.e. buying two players from the same club would see them initially playing along better with each other than with their new team mates. And this type of deal would lower overall squad gelling temporarily, but this should not affect other team members with a history of playing together for quite some time.

[SFraser]

SFraser,

Would you think that this 'Gelling' is one number for the entire squad, or a separate number for each player, or rather separate numbers for each player-player combination?

The latter would most resemble real life in my opinion. F.e. buying two players from the same club would see them initially playing along better with each other than with their new team mates. And this type of deal would lower overall squad gelling temporarily, but this should not affect other team members with a history of playing together for quite some time.

I was thinking more along the lines of a single club wide variable modified by different events, but as you point out the latter method would be most realistic, and importantly there are already player-to-player relationships so it could quite feasibly exist.

I wouldn't want to jump to conclusions as to how it works though, only point out that it is my opinion that Gelling is a measurement of Squad Cohesion that can have an actual impact ingame, and is not a measure of tactical "experience" or continuity.

Personally, I would consider it to work by evaluating a large number of indicators that already exist that would make up a judgement on "squad cohesion". Squad Harmony, Squad Relationships, Squad Match Fitness, Player Morale, General Happiness, Plans/Concerns etc. These kinds of values would all indicate how cohesive and well run and "together" a squad is, and produce a value for Gelling. I would imagine a simple way of calculating a value based on what exists and producing a squad wide benefit or negative for certain levels would be much simpler than running a complex system of player-to-player gelling relationships for everyone in the squad.

As I said though I don't want to jump to conclusions. There could be many possible ways for Gelling to actually work, producing greater or lesser demands on coding and calculations with greater or lesser rewards in terms of realism and function. The important point being that I think it is less about tactics and more about the actual cohesion of your squad in terms of playing together and playing regularly. It is less important to stick to the same tactics than it is to include players in regular team activity.

[DocSander]

There could be many possible ways for Gelling to actually work, producing greater or lesser demands on coding and calculations with greater or lesser rewards in terms of realism and function. The important point being that I think it is less about tactics and more about the actual cohesion of your squad in terms of playing together and playing regularly. It is less important to stick to the same tactics than it is to include players in regular team activity.

Indeed. Excellent point and the way you describe gelling to possibly work is in line with the (empirical based) experience that you describe. And I share that feeling with you.

My own tactical consistency is along the same lines of 6-9 most of the time, while gelling is excellent so far with about +/- 16 players contributing regularly to the starting line up over the course of a season.

Let's take your final sentence as the take home message on squad gelling!

Until more of the many mysteries of the coding of FM behind the scenes can be cleared up...

[crouchaldinho]

The consensus is that Gelling means experience with a tactic, that the longer a team plays with a certain tactic the more used to the tactic they become and the better at it they become. Changes to tactics and new players etc. reduces Gelling and the team becomes less capable at the tactic. Am I on the right track here?

I don't believe that team gelling has anything to do with tactics on FM. As I understand it, there is no 'bedding in' for new tactics/formations etc., and team gelling only impacts upon player performance.

1: My tactical consistency in season 2 is 8, and my squad Gelling hit maximum during the time I was most experimental with players and tactics. Prior to this I stuck with a very similar starting 11 and very similar tactics. Recently I have been rotating like a madman, and experimenting with completely different formations based on the same basic back four only.

Perhaps this had more to do with the fact that newer players in your side were getting games alongside some of your older players?

These two issues lead me to believe that Squad Gelling has very little to do with tactics, although tactical upheaval does matter, but is actually all about players gaining experience of playing with other players.

Does it matter though? I switch between various formations/systems and I'm not sure that I ever see any negative effects. I wonder if this is one of those FM myths?

Gelling is not a tactical issue at all. Gelling is all about how much the players at your club are used to and experienced at playing with each other. High Gelling does not equal improved ability at X tactic, it means improved ability at playing with X player.

I think you are right but that perhaps it is something even simpler than this.

My understanding is that the team gelling is a game value affecting the individual or perhaps collective abilities of the players. Similar to the way that consistency will have an effect on how often a player will reach anywhere near his full ability during the season.

1: Squad Rotation if under a certain size will actually improve Squad Gelling.

In some respects, perhaps this is true, because you are giving all of the players playing experience by rotating. In other respects though, keeping a consistent first eleven will speed up team gelling for that eleven in my experience as they are playing together regularly and getting more games under their belt, therefore reaching a good gelling level more quickly.

3: Gelled squads can transition with much more ease to new formations and playstyles because the actual player-to-player behaviour is superior.

I'm not sure that this is true. I'm not sure that tactical changes have such an effect in the game. I might be wrong about this but I haven't seen any evidence to suggest otherwise.

[crouchaldinho]

My understanding would be as detailed below.

Factors such as the importance of a match, the consistency of a player, and so on, along with a random factor (luck) impact upon how close the individual player, and the team as a whole, play to their ability. Also involved in this calculation is the team gelling level. There is, most likely, also a random factor here to have an effect on how much the team gelling will cause a 'bad day at the office'. This is why, when team gelling is low, the team will often be more inconsistent and struggle to perform.

As far as I am aware, it is simply giving your players games which will speed up team gelling. Rotating will, therefore, result in more players getting games and may sort of speed up the gelling process in the long-term. At the same time, having a consistent first eleven will speed up gelling in the short-term.

[SCIAG]

There are two possibilities, in essence, though I suppose there could be some variation. One is that "gelling" is a hidden factor we can't directly see, but we can see many of the factors that influence it- morale, happiness, whether players like each other, languages, squad cohesion, and so forth. The second is that there is not hidden "gelling", but the other factors come together to create this illusion.

I think this might be an area we shouldn't attempt to understand or quantify, so as to keep the game rooted in real football rather than quantifying it completely, especially with regards to tactical changing. Some people tweak tactics and rotate the squad all the time in order to get the most out of every match, there's another school of thought that says players will perform better if they "know" the tactic and the players around them. Neither can ever be proven the "right" or "wrong" way of playing, both methods work.

Instead of thinking about something like gelling, which is becoming the new "it's your tactics", in the narrowest, romantic sense, it makes more sense to delve in and look at it in the classic sense. You've started doing that, SFraser, in regards to players/tactics. I have to say, I largely agree with you, in that I don't think tweaking your tactics will lead to confused players necessarily.

I'm talking around the issue a bit. What I mean to say is, rather than focusing on the label of "gelling", it is more constructive to talk about each component of gelling.

• It helps if your players can communicate with each other. Signing players who don't speak the natural language of your country will have a detrimental affect.
  
• Makes sure all your players are happy, because one unhappy player can drag the others down. Give players the amount of playing time they expect. This may vary between players depending on personality, age, squad status, and more.
  
• If your players like each other, they'll perform better. Bringing in outsiders who don't like any of your current players will disrupt the squad a bit, especially if they have a contrasting personality. Such players will take a while to make friends.
  

I think little things like that could be put down to "gelling", but there are other game functions that serve the purpose better, and are more understandable.

[Xennaz]

It helps if your players can communicate with each other. Signing players who don't speak the natural language of your country will have a detrimental affect.

If your players like each other, they'll perform better. Bringing in outsiders who don't like any of your current players will disrupt the squad a bit, especially if they have a contrasting personality. Such players will take a while to make friends.

A somewhat related musing I've recently had:

If you manage a team, say, in France, but fill the entire team with Russians, for some reasons, will the game still probe you about the player not being able to speak French (especially if you, the Manager, are Russian)?

As far as personalities go, I'm also sure there are combinations of similar personalities that probably wouldn't be too fun, like a squad of Volatile/Temperamental players, instead of a diverse group including personalities like Determined, Jovial, Unambitious, etc.

[SCIAG]

A somewhat related musing I've recently had:

If you manage a team, say, in France, but fill the entire team with Russians, for some reasons, will the game still probe you about the player not being able to speak French (especially if you, the Manager, are Russian)?

As far as personalities go, I'm also sure there are combinations of similar personalities that probably wouldn't be too fun, like a squad of Volatile/Temperamental players, instead of a diverse group including personalities like Determined, Jovial, Unambitious, etc.

Languages: on 09, it definitely had to be the language of your country. Arsenal players didn't gell as they couldn't speak English, even though they spoke French.

You're right, having dangerous personalities can lead to clashes, though if you know what you're doing they can be managed, and even used in your favour. "Normal" players often don't like it if you criticise managers in the media, but more fiery ones will love it.

[Xennaz]

Interesting, about the language bit. Be interesting to see if the issue is still present.