Subject: NEWS Sokker- big changes are coming!

The issue comes with training. How do you do training without league games? There are options. You could just use friendly games for 100% of training (instead of 85%).


I agree with this. Friendly should be 100% training too.

Making it necessary for youth players to have to play in the league to reach optimal training means that competitiveness is lost and you have to choose between competing or training to a certain extent.


But beyond this, what Geston says is clear, you cannot do everything at once and reading the commitment that, for example, he has towards the game and the fact that he is working on them it's good news.

Some time ago there was a plan to make it this way, that for young players to reach 100% one friendly 90min is enough, but for older players they would need more for 100% training

The issue comes with training. How do you do training without league games? There are options. You could just use friendly games for 100% of training (instead of 85%).

exactly!!!!!

A lot of teams in my league destroy the sportsmanship in the league, because as soon as they lose a chance for the championship, they play with their young players and a situation arises that if 2 teams run for the championship, against one team they play with a strong lineup and against the other team with a weak lineup, this happened to me this season as well, and there is a situation where I will lose Championship on this, it's so discouraging and I can't blame them either, because they want the trainees to get 100% training and not 85. It's a very stupid system that hurts competitiveness almost regularly.
Here in Israel, every season someone else does it and damages the sportsmanship of competing for the championship.

maybe friendly for u21 players == 100% and for 22+ == 85% and it will good also.. i think its good option..

+

The system has been good and stable.
Now after changes, the competitiveness has been degradated in the way you are explaining and you are right about the problem. But the solution is not necessary changing that in juniors .


Why not find a positive solution, for example but not limited (as side affects could arise) to improving the prices, more international tournaments for top 6 per league. This for sure would encourage teams to buy more competitive players .

Why not find a positive solution, for example but not limited (as side affects could arise) to improving the prices, more international tournaments for top 6 per league. This for sure would encourage teams to buy more competitive players .

This would be a good option.

And when they got knocked out of that tournament you'd just have the same problem again.

The issue is Training Vs Competition. You can't train youths effectively and be competitive, they are mutually exclusive. The only way to solve it is to unlink them.

This would create inflation again and I doubt it would encourage people to play for results… especially since money from prizes etc would go into the market and then it would get drained by top sellers, as always.

It doesn’t matter if you get the prize money yourself, it matters whether this money ends up in your pocket

Yup. I’d love to play competitively, but it’s impossible for me because I must use my seven 16-18yo players in league to give them training. In other words, current system makes me throw away every second game of the season.

This would create inflation again and I doubt it would encourage people to play for results… especially since money from prizes etc would go into the market and then it would get drained by top sellers, as always.

agree, this is one of the sides effect i was talking about. and is not a ultimate solution, but in my perspective this is the direction. Inflation shopuld be controled naturally but the distribution of inflation would be better, money not only going to juniors, but also to +25yo players and it would help (only help) to solve the lack of competitivness in the game

How about we make training for U23 players 100% on friendlies and league matches and from 24y olds, they need league games for training and don't train in friendlies. That way we compensate the bonus for U23 players with a restriction for older players. Also, this will push teams to play for better results much more without the extra burden for more matches for younger players, since they need to train more! This also means, less injuries for U23 players. But then...make friendlies have very low intensity, so injuries are a rarity within friendlies. Also very few cards and rarely red cards!
In real life, U23 players are not common to be A-team based, but there are U23 A-team players. Just saying that those players need to work their way into the A-team properly. This is imo a good compromise AND makes teams play for higher stakes more!

I know some people will see this as being unfair for new teams because older teams have enough recources to buy themselves 10 star young trainees and play with an 80 rating team. Any idea on how to counter that is welcome. But I recon, this is the way we need to think...

This is +/- the way we have made project already. Formula is done.
But, once again, before decisions are made, there is nothing to be excited about. It can also never happen, like 50/50 for now.

I would seriously stop with those real life comparisons, there’s no point in them…. It’s a game, it’s not realistic, it never was and never will be

There are 16-18yo players in real life who are best on the pitch at top level football. 16-18yo players are terrible here.

+1 !!!

How about we make training for U23 players 100% on friendlies and league matches and from 24y olds, they need league games for training and don't train in friendlies

Then I would try to get out of national Cup really fast so I can get the friendly u23 bonus.
Will try to use my money in juniors and not in good players and try to win