Go to page 1, 2
| Forum » Suggestions » Does training need restructuring? | Date | |
|---|---|---|
|
Does training need completely restructuring?
|
||
|
301 msgs.
First-team player
|
i agree, i guess a good point could be that all players should improve in training, it doesn't matter if the player is cf or df or gk... if there's a player training shots on target there should be a gk, there should be a df trying to stop the shot, and a midfielder passing the ball... if a midfielder is training "regates" there should be a defender trying to stop him... of course they shouldn't improve all the same, but they all should improve something at least... PS: i also would like sth like a training match, where we may play against our subs, or youth team, in order to train tactics, etc (perhaps a bit shorter than a real match, ....0.3 of a league match )... yeah, i know it won't happen, but i guess it would be a good idea..  ... |
13/10/2011 05:49 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
108 msgs.
Substitute
|
@bluegene said: What we need is trainings by name of training 1, training 2,...... So that nobody can comment on the name. People understand this game. There must be a limit. I know training could be a little quicker but that's it. Otherwise in 2 season more even 90 avg would be of no use. That isn't it. That makes zero sense. The original post makes sense. Just because I choose to focus on training my wingers and forwards for that day, doesn't mean the rest of my team sat on their butts. In fact, I probably wouldn't mind the current training so much if I could see improvement for all of my players. At least then I'm moving somewhere. As it is now, I have to pigeonhole train one group to see any measurable gains over a period of time. |
13/10/2011 06:02 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
Go to page 1, 2
2
