Subject: [Old] Canada Senior NT Discussion

F***

they had to do that at the last second eh

Worst way to lose, I actually left the page at the 90th minute cause I thought we won, checked the game summary and see we lost 4-2!

My LF Honoré Mullin might be a NT backup, he is 6/6 still but I fear he will be 5/6 next season when he turns 18

just added him to my scouting, we'll take a look at him.

Brenden Glasgow , I was really hoping this guy would get a look. He is one of my best prospects. 16 years old, 556 OR, universal center mid.

hey how about Tristan Johnston ? 16 years old, 6/6CL, 499OR, decent qualities
and while you're at it, check Harvey Patry also

www.amomsdime.com/wp-cont...

Thank you all for your input, I can see them in database too, thank you.

It is voting time everyone. Time to get those votes in, upload your best players and prospects to the database and please work on those secondaries. We want a team that can play today, not 30 days from now! I dont know if any foreign countries view this but who cares at this point... Training should go something like this with a little room for variation. I can train a player at 6-4-3-2 and get a rating equal to primary ex. 120mid-80sp-60p-60t-40h this gives a game rating of 12... Another is my favorite, it is, 7-5-4-4-2 This trainging package actually gives you a better rating than primary ex.. 140-100-80-80-40 should give a rating of 15.. And of course if you want to use the 4-3-2-1 ratio that can get the job done with a rating equal to primary-divided by ten. Take these ratios seriously, I have put a couple hundred hours and countless players have been scouted to come up with this.. Right now there are a lot of team hammering their primaries, If you want your player on the National Team, put them in one of those proportions for consideration.. ALSO some good players are not training primary enough, stop sqeezing out OR anf get them game ready PLEASE!!! Thanks, your friendly neighbourhood skipman..

I don't think you should stick to those ratios firmly. They can be used as a good guideline but that is the old (hockey) way of thinking. Soccer is much more complex. While there is a "ratio" each position has a different ratio. I'm not talking atty:atty ratio but level of importance ratios. For example, the major secondaries on a GK work best if they're not equal, same with the small secondaries. That is why I don't think you want to consider a locked P/Ma/Me/Sm ratio but rather use it as a baseline and tweak it from there... since not all "small secondaries" should be equal - for one position and especially for all positions. While heading is more important than passing for GKs, the same is not true for center defenders.

I was only posting this as a guidline, that is why I offered different training ratio's as example's... Some managers in my opinion are going a little off kilter so i was just trying to get the message out. I know what you mean about different traing for the same influence, I have some more complex training ratio's for my center d and as well as my wingers, depending on where they play on the field, for where they play affects the ratio they have, ex a side mid playing tight to the center should use something like the 7-5-4-4-2 but the wide winger should use more speed so a 4-3-2-1 I found works better for the wide guy. But I say this cause my forward was getting an 18 rating when his primary was only 160 that is 2 levels higher, so that ratio I used was implemented to other players.. I guess we can tell a little better today, I have 5 different training ratios I have been preparing the start of the season for so after the game we can debate a little more..

Now that I rethink this, is it wrong of me to try to suggest training for other managers players.. I thought I was doing good by releasing this information. I really felt that I had the ratios's needed to maximaize players, if the community does not want my suggestions, let me know.. It is just that I get to make suggestions for the National Team and if the players are not like how I like them I wont suggest them.. Some of the players I want are differnent from slavko so i was pushing to train them a certian way so I could influence the decision to get them on the team. nough said.................

That's been a question of mine for awhile. When I was hockey NT manager I asked myself this. You can always ask, many will oblige, but players are first and foremost their club's property.

Might not be that simple. You have to consider qualities. It might be better at the end to priorize higher Q's even though it means not going exactly with an "optimal" training. At the end, it could bring higher OR, and being more profitable in terms of player performance and ratings that going by the book... That's why I hope future NT manager will have some "tolerance".