Ajaxab
05-29-2007, 10:45 AM
Given all the strategy discussions that go on with various people offering suggestions about how to deal with certain game situations, I am curious as to how people prioritize the variables in play and why. I read about suggestions people have when it comes to why some things aren't working (eg. certain defenses) and invariably another poster will respond with a variation of "it could be x or it could be y."
So I'm curious. How do you order variables like gameplanning, coaching, personnel, cohesion, statistical performance, etc. in terms of importance? Why do you put them in the order you do? Obviously, these are really intertwined, but the game forces us to privilege one over another all the time in assessing success or failure. So it seems we're constantly prioritizing on some level.
I guess the reason for the question comes in the context of trying to figure out why some teams win and some teams lose, why some players succeed and others do not. For example, is a corner a good corner because he has good stats or do the good stats come because of the gameplan he's been placed in, because he's been part of the same secondary group for five seasons in a row or because he has worked under a good coach? How would you evaluate a player like this in terms of priorities?
I suppose this kind of thinking is what makes the game fun in some respects, but because we can't see what is going on on the field frustrating in others. Thoughts?
So I'm curious. How do you order variables like gameplanning, coaching, personnel, cohesion, statistical performance, etc. in terms of importance? Why do you put them in the order you do? Obviously, these are really intertwined, but the game forces us to privilege one over another all the time in assessing success or failure. So it seems we're constantly prioritizing on some level.
I guess the reason for the question comes in the context of trying to figure out why some teams win and some teams lose, why some players succeed and others do not. For example, is a corner a good corner because he has good stats or do the good stats come because of the gameplan he's been placed in, because he's been part of the same secondary group for five seasons in a row or because he has worked under a good coach? How would you evaluate a player like this in terms of priorities?
I suppose this kind of thinking is what makes the game fun in some respects, but because we can't see what is going on on the field frustrating in others. Thoughts?