jdmk88

Understand what you're saying but I still don't think it's realistic. My team was on a great run of form and way above it's expected position in the table. Not having enough depth at right wing back should not be the reason for a "full blown dressing room revolt". If players were just concerned, a little worried, I'd understand. Instead, this tiny detail resulted in the morale of my team drastically changing.

Agree, if that's the issue, just get rid of the "additional comments" feature. It's completely pointless anyway. You can play as a real manager in fifa so not sure what other reasoning there could be.

I've never like starting my saves with a high profile team because you're always seen as "inexperienced" by the media and players, plus the manager you take over from appears to be sacked for no apparent reason. Overall, it always feels unrealistic to me and takes away from the immersion. To fix this, it would be great to take over as a current manager, instead of creating a new profile. For example, playing as Eric Ten Hag at man utd and trying to turn his fortunes around.

Completely agree, always felt odd selecting this as a response, yet you never get any backlash from it.

Okay, so what's the difference? In my mind, an inside forward is someone that should play much like an advanced forward in possession, then moves back to the wing when defending. I'm also expecting lots of diagonal runs across the marking full back. An inverted winger (in my mind), sticks to the wing until he receives the ball. Then he cuts inside, with his main aim being to create, rather than score. In games however, I just can't see a difference. Stats, highlights, positioning...it just all looks the same. Am I missing something here?

Were defending throw ins part of the update? I'm still conceding lots of goals that start from a throw in, usually a short throw. Can't tell if my defenders have really poor positioning or if it's still an issue.

It's the phrase "I believe this would make us more compact and difficult to break down". Having a lower line of engagement would make your team more compact and difficult to 'Break down'. In fact, I think this exact phrase is used when describing reasoning behind a low defensive line. I don't see how shorter passing makes a team more difficult to 'break down'. You don't 'break down' a team that's in possession. You 'break down' the defending team. I can understand how a team with short passing will be more compact if they lose the ball, perhaps making them less susceptible to counter attacks. At the same time, shorter passing could encourage overplaying, making them more susceptible to counter attacks.

Yep, you could tie that in with the first press conference when you join a new club. Answer a bunch of questions, be given a summary of your 'media management style' at then end. Lastly, be given the option to answer all future press conferences in the same way. Anything that stops you having to answer the same questions in the same way, over and over and over and over and over again.

For some time now, it has become increasingly evident that many players grapple with the nuances of media handling. Not because it's inherently complex (in fact, it's remarkably straightforward), but rather due to its monotonous and time-consuming nature. Considering this, what alternatives could we explore? In my view, the manner in which managers engage with the media is intricately linked to their distinct personalities. Take, for instance... Mourinho - A no-nonsense individual unafraid to critique players, fostering a more professional and determined approach but potentially impacting laid-back players negatively. Klopp - Exceptional with nurturing young talent and highly adept at motivation. However, one wonders if his approach is suitable for individuals who prioritise personal gains over team success (exhibiting inadequate teamwork and work rate). With these observations in mind, I propose a significant streamlining of the media handling process. Instead of individually responding to questions, an automated summary of the manager's responses could be generated during the press conference, tailored to the unique personality of each manager. For instance, a manager characterised by stringent discipline might be inclined to critique their own players more frequently. Similarly, a manager driven by unyielding determination might deliver an impassioned speech before a crucial match. Conversely, a manager lacking in interpersonal skills might inadvertently ruffle a player's feathers while discussing them in the media. Perhaps, introducing 'Media Handling' attributes, distinct from the key managerial attributes, could be a novel approach. This would encourage the signing of players that align with the manager's personality. In the case of a disciplinarian, players with high temperament and a tendency to disregard professionalism might not respond favorably to the manager's press conferences. Similarly, if a manager struggles with mentoring younger players, they might inadvertently say something in the media that doesn't resonate well with the youth in the squad. I trust that you grasp the overall concept. This proposition would infuse a fresh dynamic into the game, while mitigating the tedium associated with the conventional press conferences. No more clicking away at the second option from the left, just a news article showing how you answered important questions in a press conference based on your personality. Players react based on their traits and their view of you.