Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

scass

Members
  • Content Count

    172
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About scass

  • Rank
    Amateur

Favourite Team

  • Favourite Team
    Derry City

Currently Managing

  • Currently Managing
    Man Utd

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. All the assistants are terrible. Why does everyone who questions the game get this same aggressive response from you?
  2. I agree - the important thing is recognising that there is a difference between managing a team, and controlling it. A lot of people expect the latter, which is a completely different ball game. It probably stems from a prevailing view in the real life game that managers are like chess grandmasters - Klopp, Guardiola and in a more negative way Mourinho are particularly regarded in this light. But ultimately Klopp's teams play the way they do not just because of the system but because he is adept at picking players who will flourish within that system. There might be an argument that in FM, dynamics are a bit overemphasised in the current iteration, but that's a different story. You can't expect players to follow everything to the letter. That wouldn't be football management.
  3. I think these look great. Will team Dynamics still be as emphasised (tbh, over-emphasised in my opinion) as in the current iteration?
  4. The whole team dynamics aspect needs to be looked at. That much is clear from this thread. Players' "morale" and "happiness" seems way over-emphasised to me.
  5. scass

    Bringing on Subs

    1. The overall squad body language is an interesting thing to raise. It's usually extremely good or perfect on the bench if we're winning, while on the pitch it tends towards a majority motivated and a few calm or composed. As @FrazT said though, you would expect a young players to want to impress. If this was an indicator of a lack of professionalism and only occurred with some players, then it would be easier to give it some credence. But at the moment it is a default. 2. As I said in an earlier post, I have used all the possibilities - "I have faith" usually "happy", then on the pitch complacency. "No pressure" - relaxed, then complacency. "Want to see a good performance" - reaction can be deep in thought, or happy, or motivated. Two minutes on the pitch, and we get complacency. In the end, though, I think we're all talking about something that is down to lazy thinking, not a game wrecking problem.
  6. scass

    Bringing on Subs

    Drop the attitude? Wow.
  7. scass

    Bringing on Subs

    If we're ahead in a game by more than two goals, yes. if you read the thread back, you'll see we are talking about a specific situation. But don't sweat it, it's an annoyance. If you can't see a problem, there isn't one. You're the expert.
  8. scass

    Bringing on Subs

    Specific situation? Every time. Are you telling me that it doesn't happen to you? Because if you are, i don't believe you. Get honest.
  9. scass

    Bringing on Subs

    That simply isn't true. And you know it. You can bring on players who are "driven" or with high determination. You can bring on a world class player. Or a seasoned pro. Same result. It actually doesn't make a lot of difference but if giving young players game time to develop them is important in the game - one of the best things about the game IMHO, then maybe this needs to be ironed out.
  10. scass

    Bringing on Subs

    I think that's disingenuous if you don't mind me saying so. I have gone through the range of instructions - including, on your advice a while ago, "I want to see good performance". It doesn't work. it seems like an automatic thing. Same as when you promote a player to the first team, he is immediately "getting frustrated at the number of opportunities in the first team". That is before there's even been a game. It would probably be better if you admitted it was something worth giving attention to, rather than stonewalling unhelpfully.
  11. That's very true - saying that it's going to be a tough game, or that you're not confident can sometimes spur a reaction from players. But overall, what you're describing - the overlap between interaction and dynamics - seems to have a disproportionate influence on how the team plays. There is a somewhat unreal sense in which the way your team plays has less to do with how good they are, how well you've developed them, or the tactics you use, than it has to do with how good they're feeling on a particular day. I've had a team win a ECC game 4-0, and all experience a dramatic drop in morale. The reason seems most likely to be a player sent off, who objected to his fine, but when he was told it was a standard punishment, he said he understood it. But then his morale dropped (after that) to "Slightly poor", and everyone else dropped in morale too. No-one had anything as a negative that would explain it. The whole thing seemed arbitrary. You might say that how you manage that is part of the game, and it is, but I didn't buy the game to deal with random nonsense like this. There are loads of managers who make a lot of noise, be they late-period Jose Mourinho, second Chelsea season Conte or Neil Warnock - but it's generally negative in the way they do it. Klopp, on the other hand, has got it down to a fine art. But I don't think that's how people want to play the game, reading this thread.
  12. Actually, it worked for me the first time. But the situation continued, and it didn't work three years later.
  13. It's pointless arguing, when you can't understand that saying it probably was more enjoyable, but was lagging in terms of quality is not a strong argument. It seems to have escaped you that what the FM12 posters were comparing was the tactical move,emt of the players, nothing more. It's irrelevant to do what you have done, which is raise collisions, because that isn't the point being made. bringing this into the discussion simply avoids the issue that others are talking about, because your said, as ever, is sniping at anyone who criticises any aspect of a game which you freely admit you don't actually play. Got it?
  14. I didn't actually say you wanted a simpler game. I said that here are shades of opinion, and that it was dangerous to reduce things to the binary - but you're just re-iterated your determination to reduce it to people who only want tactical instructions, and people who want a game with all the interaction. That's reducing it to the binary, and it's misleading in terms of the issues that have been brought up. If I read the thread, I wasn't see the division you're talking about. You're always going to get the odd poster who says "it's rubbish, it should be in the game" but actually most of the criticism( include that coming from some of the mods) points to improving interaction. It doesn't always have to be an argument - in fact, it is usually better when it isn't.
  15. I can only read it one way - in English, giving the words their normal meaning. It's not a question of what I want to hear from it.
×