Lead Coach Rating

[frankstuber]

It has been my understanding that only the lead coach affects training quality whereas the supporting coaches assigned to the same training category affect the overall workload but not the quality of the training. If that was to hold true than it would not matter at all whether the supporting coach is a one star coach or a four star coach.

What makes me wonder is that when the AI assigns the coaches it will never put a one star coach as the supporting coach. Instead the AI will always make sure that the second coach in any given category is at least mediocre and it will even sacrifice the lead coach rating in another training category to achieve this. To some extent it would also contradict reality to assume that the second coach in a training category is not influencing the quality of training, i.e. to say that it doesn't matter whether the person is one star or three star.

If anyone can share some insights that would be greatly appreciated.  

[Experienced Defender]

Looks like one for @Seb Wassell 

[warlock]

For what it's worth, I've always assumed that the lead coach sets the quality; additional coaches of any ability reduce the workload. And I've always had good training results and player development. It's also pretty academic outside the top clubs - for 90% of teams you can't attract top quality coaches and you've never enough to cover all the bases properly.

[frankstuber]

Thanks, appreciate it, you are much more experienced than me, but please consider I don't think it is academic outside the top clubs. Is is much cheaper for a lower league club to have a 3,5* star lead coach supported by a 3* star coach than a 4/4,5* coach supported by a 1* coach. Particularly for lower league clubs I think this is a very relevant question.

[warlock]

2 hours ago, frankstuber said:

Is is much cheaper for a lower league club to have a 3,5* star lead coach supported by a 3* star coach than a 4/4,5* coach supported by a 1* coach

Well, it isn't really about money. Consider that you have 10 training categories (two each for GKs, fitness, defending, attacking and possession). I've managed a lot of teams outside the Premiership and never had 10 first-team coaches, and in the lower leagues it's more usual to have 5 or 6. That means my best coaches always have to take two categories, and there's rarely anyone spare to provide support. It's a juggling act to provide enough bodies to avoid 'heavy' workloads - usually the best I can manage is 'average' with sessions led by an effective 2.5* coach.

What I don't really know is whether it's better to have a session with a 3* coach and a heavy workload; or a 2.5* coach with an average workload 

[rsihn]

On 16/10/2020 at 04:45, frankstuber said:

What makes me wonder is that when the AI assigns the coaches it will never put a one star coach as the supporting coach. Instead the AI will always make sure that the second coach in any given category is at least mediocre and it will even sacrifice the lead coach rating in another training category to achieve this. To some extent it would also contradict reality to assume that the second coach in a training category is not influencing the quality of training, i.e. to say that it doesn't matter whether the person is one star or three star.

If anyone can share some insights that would be greatly appreciated.  

One thing to note is that depending on the quality of your assman, their goal when using the auto-assignment button isn't necessarily to create the highest quality training session so much as it is to improve your coach's ability.  I'm not sure which, if any, stat controls their ability to do this but I suspect it is Judging Staff Ability and I also suspect that the quality of your Technical Director may play a part in this.  

Like you, I at first thought that the assman was just making a bunch of stupid decisions but after manually optimizing everything for my players for a couple of seasons, I decided to let him do his thing uninterrupted.  I started to notice there was a clear plan to his decisions and he would eventually make all of my coaches fairly well rounded rather than min-maxing them in any particular stats.  As I said before though, he isn't necessarily focused on providing the best training for the players and focuses on the coach's development.