scass

No, seriously - this guy's Set Piece coaching is 6, and he's being suggested as a set piece coach. I'd fire the Technical Director, but it would make no difference. What's the point of having his feature in the game if it's this badly executed? Is it just so that we have buttons to press?

Here's a random example of inexplicable "advice." This player arrived two weeks ago, has shown no change in attributes, and has played in three friendlies with an average rating of 7.27. Note also the Nick Cox supposed attributes for judging talent. There doesn't seem to be any point in swamping some good ideas, like the staff meeting, with nonsense like this. About 90% of the advice is like this - it would be great if weighing up what coaches were telling you meant thinking, but tbh it's safe to just keep clicking "move on" until you get to the end of the meeting.

Indeed. And personalised training. "His off the ball movement is no longer a weakness' - and it's 10. For a supposedly high potential striker. The staff meeting could be such an important and useful part of the game. Instead, it's a drudge of hitting the "move on" button, and getting to the end as quickly as possible. At the moment, staff interaction appears meaningless.

Some sense that the backroom staff mean something. Huge amounts of the advice seems designed for you to disagree with (moving a striker to a midfield mentoring group; hiring a mediocre staff member; changing training assignments when the coach is best suited to the one you've chosen.) Improving your support staff should be a way of improving the team's performance, but nothing I've ever seen over multiple iterations of the game seems to suggest this is true. Firing a staff member who persistently talks nonsense should stop the nonsense, but it doesn't.