You can train 3x U21 at 100% not 133%. Plus 3x subU21 at 100% -(y. Trainer). Or 3x U21 at 100% plus 6 at 75%-(y. trainer). Yes you can train 6x players at 75% but that is not much faster than we have and you can't train 6x at 100% in 1v1 or JS so it's probably closer to today than it looks.
Sorry but I learned in school that 3+3=6. Care to enlighten me how 3 U21 players and 3 sub-U21 players do not equate to 6 players?
Tho I think your suggestion for limiting the youth trainers effect to just Thursday seems like a better move if you want to make things more challenging. Although maybe the players trained under the youth trainer can't be subjected to the 60/80 minute requirement (since only the minutes of 1 game will be taken into account). If it's still subjected to the 60/80 minute requirement, it seems like a waste of resources to hire a youth trainer. Personally I'd rather train my 18-19 year olds in the main training slots than hire a separate youth trainer for them. The first two seasons is mostly 1 on 1 anyway, and the money I'd earn from selling them isn't worth the about I'd spend to bid on youth trainers then pay their salary for the whole 28 weeks.
That said, may I know what a TM is?
As far as tanking goes I don't believe this is actually bad for the game as a whole. Being able to stay at the top like RL teams can is unhealthy.
No tanking does not mean staying at the top all the time. They want every team to compete every season, just like how the NBA wants. They don't want teams purposely throwing games and losing games yet gain benefit from it. As someone from Europe, I'm sure you're familiar with football leagues you all have there? Are there any teams which lose on purpose so they can win the league in a few season's time? That's probably what they are looking for. Less incentives for losing on purpose.