I'm trying to get a feel for each training type, with the goal of identifying what's the best, or most....economical, the most bang for buck, so to speak. What's most or least effecient. I'm thinking of centering my training on my 6 best guys, but I'd like to supplement that with regular team training. Then occasionally I'd like to drop a team training on them too. I'm currently trying to feel my weaknesses.
If you're determined to try something "outside the box" you could look at something like this:
Week 1:
Train: A, B, C, D, E, F
Sit: G
Week 2:
Train: G, C, D, E, F, F
Sit: A
Week 3:
Train: A, G, C, D, E, F
Sit: B
Week 4:
Train: A, B, G, D, E, F
Sit: C
Week 5:
Train: A, B, C, G, E, F
Sit: D
Week 6:
Train: A, B, C, D, G, F
Sit: E
Week 7:
Train: A, B, C, D, E, G
Sit: F
...Repeat cycle...
This is a two-postion training program for 7 players, each player misses 2 trainings a season. So after 7 seasons, they would be 1 full season behind in development compared to a 6 player two-position program.
Possible benefits would be:
injury insurance, if one guy goes down then you just keep training the 6 healthy guys
more managable salaries due to slower training speed
depth, you can focus on buying players for 1-3 positions, your trainees can eat up minutes as backups in non-training positions in addition to their full 48 in training positions
Disclaimer: Might be a terrible idea, might be better with 4 players in one-position training, etc. I'll echo what others have said, I really don't think you'll be happy with the results of combo three-position/team training, but I have no experience to back that statement up with, either.
Last edited by Harold Miner at 3/11/2017 10:22:47 PM