Subject: Strikers - a discussion

Moving on to the next position... strikers. Since I train strikers, I have a lot of variety, but for my first team it's one technical striker (incredible tech), one quick striker (formidable + pace), and one defensive striker with PM and passing and defense. I play two strikers on the point, which means a lot of my goals come on through balls.

I guess a lot of people don't play with a defensive striker, and mine don't get a lot of goals, but they help in terms of ball control and keeping the ball in the opponents half.

I generally prefer strikers with high secondaries (formidable +) over strikers with high striking. My top scoring striker only has excellent striker, and he's scored a number of times on Bogan wil good - solid striking. My philosophy... it's better to be able to get in position to shoot than to shoot well and never be in position. I've got an 19 yo with formidable pace and formidable technique with only unsatisfactory striking.

I agree, I think secondaries are alot more useful then striking.

I just got rid of a guy that's been on my team since day one. He only had adequate striking (later popped to good). But his secondaries were good enough (for c-league), and he became the backbone of my team.

I train strikers as well, but have not trained striking in the past 3 seasons. I totally agree that pace and technique are more important. But I do want my starting strikers to have at least formidable striking.

I sold a player with this blend of skills a while ago:

very good stamina,
formidable pace,
good technique,
very good passing,
hopeless keeper
poor defender
very good playmaker
incredible striker

He was rejected multiple times by the NT of his country due to "not having high enough striking". I can see thumbing your nose at good tech, but needing more than incr striking???

And it wasn't a huuuge country, so not like they had ubertalented players.

On a player like that, I would have spent much more time on technique and much less on striking. Players seem to get more goals when the skills are blended more closely.

I didn't train him striking more than 1-2 weeks.

Well, whoever trained him.

yeah, that good tech is a joke.

Wrong. I've got a starting striker that looks like this:

Sebastian Zborowski, age: 23
value: 234 250 $, wage: 3 025 $
club: Nanook of the North, country: Polska
solid form, formidable tactical discipline
bookings:

solid stamina, tragic keeper
solid pace, good defender
adequate technique, poor playmaker
adequate passing, incredible striker


I bought him cheap, and have gotten some random pops. That said, his adequate tech is good enough that he averages in the mid-40's and gets me plenty of goals (5 against Pinky in the ML opener). You can cover up mediocre tech if you position your forwards well and get them the ball in the open.

I'd never buy a striker with that skill set, unless he was amazingly cheap.

as i see it, he was amazingly cheap.

Bought him for $619k. He's playing well, and I'll be selling him next season for $1.25m - $1.5m or so, given the expected 2 pops in pace and 1 in tech.

LOL, true enough he was cheap :)

my keeper is going to score 5 goals against ppirates heh

Sigh. My keeper didn't even get off a shot. I'm mediocre.

SECONDARIES > STRIKING

In my cup match, I played my 2 b-team striker trainees. One of which I just bought, and he played his very first game today. He got FOUR goals.

Claude Ferrell, age: 20
value: 77 000 $, wage: 1 125 $
club: Ball Crushers, country: USA
solid form, tragic tactical discipline

average stamina, hopeless keeper
solid pace, weak defender
very good technique, hopeless playmaker
weak passing, weak striker
(edited)