nuphonic

By the way, this thread is becoming more and more interesting, so kudos to Pangaea for steering it off its original subject

Pangaea

Can't remembe which version that was, but it was horrible! Couldn't figure out WTF each thing did. It was just a mess. Glad they got rid of it. Perhaps not very good the way it is now either, but at least it's possible to know what trains what. And you don't need a doctorate to enter the training screen.

As I said while you pre-empted me (), I think it would be fairly realistic with general offensive and defensive schemes. Specialized schemes for each position is way over the top at this low level though.

desalvo

1-1½ hours of training per week seems very little for a side playing in, say, blue square. Atleast compared to the amount of training you do at low levels here in Sweden.

Anywho, I'd argue that any manager in charge of a senior team knows enough about footie to string together a few decent drills focusing on relevant areas for relevant players.

scottn72

desalvo, Highland League is classed as Junior football, amatuer in other words. Although I doubt many Scottish 3rd Division teams do much more, 3 night a week perhaps.

desalvo

Ah.

I would say traditions of the amount of training must differ a lot between Sweden and GB. Even amateur leagues would do more than 1-2h a week here.

Pangaea

1-2 hours a week and 3 nights a week is very different

Without much knowledge about it, I reckon 2-3 trainings a week, plus a match, is quite common. FM takes this into consideration with PT training vs FT training.

It then depends how much specialization is realistic. One could actually argue that following the general scheme is unrealistic as both strikers and DCs follow the same training. But in RL they would not do that. They will probably not have different schemes, but play to their position and thus get off/def training.

Thought I haven't made any such schemes so far, I'm thinking about doing it now when this has been discussed a little bit.

From my own experience, we didn't have specialized training. We had some technical sessions, some "work your tits off sessions" (too many for my liking! ) and regular play (usually in 2-3 teams of 7 or 11 players, with some 5-a-side sessions or play in small teams against full-sized goals to get more effective training in offense and defense).

Based on this I think it would be realistic and within LLM ethos to make some general offensive and defensive schedules, as FM doesn't take into account the above. But creating positional schemes would be pushing to too far, as that would require both more coaches, resources and better training facilities. How can there be ~6 groups traning in a meaningful way on a regular full-sized pitch, for example? You need more space, and you need more coaches, plus various equipment used on the pitch. Small clubs don't have the resources, facilities or personnell for that.

Klipdrift

In my opinion it's up to the manager if he wants to create specialized schedules or use the general ones.

It's likely that managers in, for example, Conference South would differ from each other with regard to training set-up. You could easily give your players independent exercises to do, even with a limited amount of coaches.

So, in my opinion training set-up is very dependant of the manager in charge. Personally I don't use specialized part-time training because to me it seems the workload is so low that it doesn't make a difference.

BluMoon

Personally, I use semi-specialised part time training, very similar to the way that Pangaea has mentioned. What I do (without trying to be detailed enough to be tipping) is just have a defensive schedule and an offensive schedule. My view on this is that it's basically along the lines of during a shooting drill, the forwards would shoot, and the defenders would try to stop them. We do these sorts of drills at my football training, so defensive/offensive players develop what they need to develop.

turnip

Personally, I just set the specialised schedules up. It's then the AssMan's job to make them work. God knows he doesn't do anything else very well.

Nobby_McDonald

I've always used my own schedules, except for the couple of year spell when you had to assign actual activities to session times. That was confusing beyond belief.

By and large these schedules have helped my players develop a little bit quicker.
I've retrained players in the past too. Some hate it and it's a complete waste of time, but some happily get on with it and in time they have another/a use.