Anyone here not rotate their squad?

[FootballManager89]

I know here in american sports you always play your best possible team for any game that matters. It seems on FM you have to play some of your worst players or your squad just revolts on you. So I'm wondering if anyone just does like me and for all league games/champions league games just plays the best possible lineup they can put on the pitch and just ignores all the complaints from their players because at the end of the day its about winning not squad harmony amirite guys?

[Haiku]

It depends. Playing as Everton I don't care about certain players in my first season, but usually by my second or third season I already have 22 players of similar quality, so I don't bother to rotate them heavily. Playing in lower leagues I tend to pick my best eleven every match and I don't hassle to keep my backups. As long as they want to go, I let them go. 

[Spurs08]

Nope. Football in real life is definitely not like American sports in that regard and the game replicates that. The unhappy players can end up refusing to sign new contracts, leaving you without good backups if injuries occur to your first XI, or worse their unhappiness can see you sacked. The first XI is also more likely to get injured or perform poorly, especially if you have two fixtures most weeks. And apart from anything else the idea of a "best" team is much harder to define. You might have some standout players who are clearly always worth putting in, but for others the best option can depend on who you're playing against. For instance, if the opposition fall-back is old, unfit, or just not very good, I'll often try and put a pacy winger up against them rather than a more technically minded playmaker, even if the latter is generally the better player.

[Spurs08]

That said you can get away without it, especially short term, in part because the AI in FM doesn't rotate as much as real managers do or as much as it should and often starts players on the verge of collapse rather than an only slightly inferior squad option.

[TheHomeEnd]

Quote

I do to stop players getting on my back

Edited March 19, 2018 by TheHomeEnd
Missed a m in my

[FrazT]

I suspect that the game doesn't accurately reflect the problems of lack of squad rotation in real life but I suppose we don't know that.  I recall in Leicester's run-in to their EPL win, Ranieri chose the approx same team for about 10-12 games and there is no doubt that if that had happened in FM, the squad would have been on strike and every Monday morning there would have been a 15 man queue at his door to complain!  I often feel that I am picking a team, not necessarily to win a game, but to keep squad harmony in balance and that is, in my view not right.  Consequently, I choose to rotate often as I really can't be bothered with all the squad hassle of picking my strongest team ( although I do pick them for all very important matches )

[Shi Xiansheng]

What about injuries?  Is there a measure of fatigue the game keeps track of we can't see (that is, "behind" the condition percentage), over the course of a season or multiple seasons, where a player being played into the ground gets jaded or has an increased risk of injury even if his condition on a given day seems fine?  I play like there is.  I mean, I try not to rotate too much just because I don't have quality backups, and I certainly will play a player whose condition is in the 80s if I feel I have to, but I will sometimes rest a slightly but not overly tired player for no reason other than he's been playing a lot.  Is this a waste of sorts?  Am I voluntarily handicapping myself in those matches (setting aside the fringe benefit of pleasing the backup)?

[dcaine100]

I play as Arsenal and have a first team and second team thats almost as good as the first which I normally rotate for example my first XI plays in the league then change my entire XI for a champions league group game.

This way my squad is always well rested, happy and developing well.

[Tunafishdon]

I simply play the best team for the situation. I hve a constant midfield and defence in a 4-2-3-1. The attack is what changes. If players get unhappy i recommend you sell them and bring in someone with similar attributes and thtz ready to accept a lesser contract. They are available 4 sure!!

[hluraven]

I never rotate, as long as you have suitable back-ups rather than star players who should be playing somewhere, it is easy enough to handle occasional moans. 

The main problem is that it is just so easy for a human manager to keep everyone fit/injury free, you just don't need to rotate. In real life, it is essential - in FM it isn't.

[steakfaced]

5 hours ago, dcaine100 said:

I play as Arsenal and have a first team and second team thats almost as good as the first which I normally rotate for example my first XI plays in the league then change my entire XI for a champions league group game.

This way my squad is always well rested, happy and developing well.

I used to do this but then I get really disappointed for some reason seeing players only playing 20-25 league games. It just annoys me and I find it unrealistic.

[Liamgannon]

i have around 28 players and i rotate all the time. This is especially true for my front three. My strikers consist of M'bappe, cavani, neymar, dolberg, martinez and weah and they have pretty much all played a similar amount of games throughout my last season. Maybe i do this because my tactic is super aggressive with strikers expected to close down all the time and run around like mad men. 

Some may not agree with my management style but its great knowing that i can throw any combination of players together and they'll still score goals for me because they all get to play regularly and morale is always high. 

i also think this helps in relation to team dynamics. All my players are used to playing with a good number of different combinations. 

[kingjericho]

I rotate moderately, for me it's key to have a squad with many options:

- prevents injury crisis

- rotating a lot helps keep the players with match fitness

- reduces unhappy players

- less likely to cause collapse of an entire season if I need to sell one good player

[Spurs08]

15 hours ago, FrazT said:

I suspect that the game doesn't accurately reflect the problems of lack of squad rotation in real life but I suppose we don't know that.  I recall in Leicester's run-in to their EPL win, Ranieri chose the approx same team for about 10-12 games and there is no doubt that if that had happened in FM, the squad would have been on strike and every Monday morning there would have been a 15 man queue at his door to complain!  I often feel that I am picking a team, not necessarily to win a game, but to keep squad harmony in balance and that is, in my view not right.  Consequently, I choose to rotate often as I really can't be bothered with all the squad hassle of picking my strongest team ( although I do pick them for all very important matches )

What did happen though at Leicester is that when things went less well the following year the squad seemed to turn on the manager, he was sacked, and then they miraculously improved the moment he was gone. We'll never know for sure from the outside but it certainly looked like squad harmony or the lack of it had played a big role - he was able to paper over those cracks of course while they were winning the league but in the long term there was a cost to it.

[JordanMilly]

17 hours ago, Shi Xiansheng said:

What about injuries?  Is there a measure of fatigue the game keeps track of we can't see (that is, "behind" the condition percentage), over the course of a season or multiple seasons, where a player being played into the ground gets jaded or has an increased risk of injury even if his condition on a given day seems fine?  I play like there is.  I mean, I try not to rotate too much just because I don't have quality backups, and I certainly will play a player whose condition is in the 80s if I feel I have to, but I will sometimes rest a slightly but not overly tired player for no reason other than he's been playing a lot.  Is this a waste of sorts?  Am I voluntarily handicapping myself in those matches (setting aside the fringe benefit of pleasing the backup)?

If you go into the Medical Centre tab, or, whilst on the Squad or Tactics screen add the various Injury columns, then yes, it shows you how worn out a player is and that, although they may have the conditioning (stamina, etc) to play, playing over and over will lead to them getting injuries because they aren't getting any rest.

[Shi Xiansheng]

I don't see anything like a Medical Center.  The Injury column simply states what current injury, if any, a player has.  Doesn't even say the expected length out.  It certainly doesn't show how worn out a player is.  I suspect whatever you're talking about may not exist in FM 16.

Regardless, I'm not entirely sure you've answered the question—when you say "it shows you how worn out a player is," what does this look like?  Is it a number differing from the usual Condition percentage?  Does it exist in FM 16, whether visibly or not?

[JordanMilly]

1 minute ago, Shi Xiansheng said:

I don't see anything like a Medical Center.  The Injury column simply states what current injury, if any, a player has.  Doesn't even say the expected length out.  It certainly doesn't show how worn out a player is.  I suspect whatever you're talking about may not exist in FM 16.

Regardless, I'm not entirely sure you've answered the question—when you say "it shows you how worn out a player is," what does this look like?  Is it a number differing from the usual Condition percentage?  Does it exist in FM 16, whether visibly or not?

Oh, you didn't say at any point you were using FM16, which would likely greatly influence the replies you get, given the changes from FM16 to even 17 or 18 regarding injuries, condition, etc.

[Shi Xiansheng]

Surely even if particulars and interface change, someone must know whether something so fundamental exists in the game or not?  If so, it would probably have existed for many years, and if not, its introduction would be a big deal.  As I said, I play like it does, because I assume it does—FM has a great level of detail and leaving out something so important to football would seem a huge oversight that makes no sense—but I've not actually seen any evidence.  Are you certain it exists in FM 18, or are you just talking about the usual Condition percentage (or something that's replaced that)?

[Spurs08]

2 hours ago, Shi Xiansheng said:

Surely even if particulars and interface change, someone must know whether something so fundamental exists in the game or not?  If so, it would probably have existed for many years, and if not, its introduction would be a big deal.  As I said, I play like it does, because I assume it does—FM has a great level of detail and leaving out something so important to football would seem a huge oversight that makes no sense—but I've not actually seen any evidence.  Are you certain it exists in FM 18, or are you just talking about the usual Condition percentage (or something that's replaced that)?

It's always been there, but in FM18 it became much more visible to users and therefore easy to manage through a dedicated Medical Centre screen. It was one of the major new features for this year's game.

[Rashidi]

I tend to rotate heavily not to keep squad harmony, but to make sure my best 11 are always available for the toughest games. I feel that my squad can win every game if I play optimally, and thats optimal play imho. Playing your best 11 for every match is not feasible, because injuries will strike your team and you are not developing fringe players to the best of your ability. 

A successfully managed team is one where you can achieve the perfect balance of having your best 11 for the toughest games whilst still being able to provide enough match exposure for those who need to develop.

[Shi Xiansheng]

6 hours ago, Spurs08 said:

It's always been there, but in FM18 it became much more visible to users and therefore easy to manage through a dedicated Medical Centre screen. It was one of the major new features for this year's game.

Thanks.  Would have been a bit annoyed if SI overlooked this, to be honest, plus annoyed at some poor results obtained when resting players who could have played.  If I were to discover long-term wear and tear isn't in the game, I might even be tempted to continue to rotate as before to role play its existence, which would be awkward, to say the least.

[tiago_wakabayashi]

Rarely. I prefer keep my team as this is possible.  But when is a match with less risk, or when I need really rest any player or give some minutes of match to some players, I rotate but I don't like it much because I have better results with my certain starters then anything that breaks that sequence is a problem. 

[sporadicsmiles]

Unless I am playing for a team that cannot afford enough players, I always rotate, a lot. 

I have to note here that a lot of people seem to rotate only to keep players happy. If you have players who you only play to keep them happy, then get rid of them and bring in someone you do want at the club. It can be an upgrade on a current player, or a younger prospect, but there is no point keeping players you do not trust to play. 

In the end, actually, man management is quite easy. If a player asks me for game time, and my immediate response is not "wow I do not want you to go, lets sort this out", then I will look to let them go. There is no room in my side for players who I do not trust to play. So after 2 or 3 seasons, my squad is comprised of only players whom I want to play games for me, either because they are at the peak of their game, they have potential, or they are my own youth prospects. I now very rarely have someone become unhappy unless they are close to the point where I would sell them. 

I cannot stress how important I find rotation anyway. It allows me to keep my squad fresh. How many times do you come up against the AI who have played two games in succession, and their squad is knackered to start? If I can play a fully fit, fully rested side, I have the advantage before we even start. It also cuts down on injuries, and makes it so injuries are in general not hugely disruptive. In the lower leagues, when I cannot rotate or build a squad as I would like, a couple of injuries to key players can absolutely kill your season. 

[Tajerio]

In England, where I spend most of my FM time, I find you have to rotate.  If you've got a moderately successful side, you've got 38 league matches, 3 or 4 matches per cup, and at least 6 matches in Europe.  That's over 50 matches in ten months, and if you make a deeper run in any of the cup competitions it just gets worse.

I also rotate in order to develop players, as others have said--right now in my game, for instance, Michael Keane is still better than my newgen CD, but if I give the newgen game time he'll be better than Keane in a couple of years.

And there's also the consideration of "do I even have a best XI?"  I like to follow Cleon's policy of not having a squad full of players who play roles in the same way.  For the CM-s role in my 4-4-1-1, for instance, I have one dynamic box-to-box player, and one intelligent playmaker.  I wouldn't say one is strictly better than the other, because their usefulness depends on the match situation and the opposition.  So I rotate them.

[Rashidi]

22 minutes ago, Tajerio said:

In England, where I spend most of my FM time, I find you have to rotate. 

In the championship if you don't rotate, you won't have a fit 11 to finish the season with :-)

[Trent71]

Wherever I'm managing, I always get questioned by the media "you've used 37-39 players during the season, the highest in the league, why is that?". I not only rotate two equal 11s but I try to give playing time to u19 players when I'm 3:0 up at half time or after an hour of play. I often get so carried away rotating that key players (like Lukaku or Pogba) have come moaning about first team football

For example, last season, De Gea got nearly 40 games, while Romero was about the 15 game mark, and Perreira appeared in about 3-4 matches - and that's just the gk slot. For Romero, I was keen on giving him playing time too, so that I can easily find a buyer after the first season and replace him with a British talent - he went to Chelsea for about 15m euro, which I think is pretty good business.

 

I also often "do a Fergie" - play youths either to hype their price up or to make more clubs interested in loaning them. 

[santy001]

My problems tend to occur with the gradual accumulation of key players/first team players over-time. It's rare for me to have players of squad status 'back up' despite the fact that is all that some are. I do rotate a lot by design though, once my team is at its best I will have 2 players for each position - but usually with a bit of difference between them. A favourite of mine is my 2 central strikers for example, one will be just a brilliant predatory striker, the other will be the biggest 6'4"+ guy who's pretty handy I can find. Cliche I suppose, but sometimes for all his abundance of skill/ability a striker who is very technically gifted can just be crowded out, or your best chances are coming from crosses - so you need someone to capitalise. 

 

[Jamieac]

I rotate pretty much only for fatigue reasons and avoiding injury purposes. 

I really don't care much for complaints I don't usually find it has much of an effect on the overall team. I operate very Fergie like, players only leave when I want them to, no matter how much they sulk. 

[Tom8983]

Yeah I'm pretty big on rotation. I don't like starting players who are any less than 93-94% fit. I tend to have 2 completely different starting 11s, and a handful of younger players I'm trying to bring through.

[alanschu14]

I definitely have better players for my top 11, and a lot of my rotation is only for fatigue reasons. This might change as my club grows.  I do try to make sure I can get promising kids some play time against weaker sides however!
 

[vrbrasa]

Em 20/03/2018 em 03:36, Rashidi disse:

I tend to rotate heavily not to keep squad harmony, but to make sure my best 11 are always available for the toughest games. I feel that my squad can win every game if I play optimally, and thats optimal play imho. Playing your best 11 for every match is not feasible, because injuries will strike your team and you are not developing fringe players to the best of your ability. 

A successfully managed team is one where you can achieve the perfect balance of having your best 11 for the toughest games whilst still being able to provide enough match exposure for those who need to develop.

hi @Rashidi, what is your rules about rotation? how do you do it?

[f.zaarour]

I rotate quite a lot, as i feel i have too.

- To keep harmony in the team (some players complaining way to fast otherwise).
- Keeping the team overall in good match ritm (so if one gets injured or suspended the other will be ready).
- Focus also on having always the best 11 in important matches (fit and ready).
- Keep an eye on those players who have to low fitness after a game (option to give them training rest). 

And that is why i work towards a strong 22 men squad. But i have to say it shouldn't be that some players are awful in fitness after a game and not ready for the next mid week game. I mean in real life many play 3 games in a week without any problems and on a high level. But maybe it is something you can increase with training. And i understand that rotating with smaller clubs will be tougher as you dont have enough players or a good balance overall. 

Edited March 29, 2020 by f.zaarour

[Rashidi]

Pretty much like how everyone does it. And it also depends on my long term development plans

If I have no one to care about in terms of development strat, then my sub style is basically based around having options on the bench to change things around. So it depends on players that are vulnerable to getting injured or match weary. I have some tactics that are dependant on my wingbacks, so having a rotation strategy for them is important. The challenge with this is finding the right players so they all don't get unhappy.

Rotation as a part of keeping the squad happy, and fit. 
And I pay attention to injury susceptibility. If a player has a recurring injury and has very high susceptibility I normally either don't play him or just keep him on the bench in case things re desperate and I need to bring him on.

So my rotation strategy is either to develop the young, to keep players fit and happy or both.