The 5-Minute Player Diagnostic

Why

The Coach’s Compass Day 1 diagnoses a TEAM; this diagnoses ONE PLAYER, which is the entry point to the pathway-led strategy (Framework, Sessions, IDP). A coach who rates one player and gets a development focus has just done, by hand, the first step of FootballGPT’s My Coaching Path — the product is the obvious “now track this properly for the whole squad” next step. Lane = grassroots player development; funnel product = FootballGPT.

What

Static page at 360tft.co.uk/player-diagnostic/:

• Adapt the Compass Day 1 mechanic (rating buttons, deterministic calculateResults-style scoring, age-group framing) to a single player: technical, tactical, physical, and mental categories with rubric descriptions rewritten for individual assessment. Derive rubrics from the existing Compass diagnostic content; no invented assessment science.
• Result: the player’s strongest area, biggest development focus, and one concrete thing to work on at the next session (sourced, not fabricated).
• Explicit privacy framing: no names entered, nothing stored, everything stays in the coach’s browser.
• CTA: FootballGPT (per-player development tracking). UTM per convention.
• Free Gumroad companion: printable player diagnostic sheet (rate the whole squad on paper). Listing copy drafted; KEVIN creates the listing; claims tagged for a hub sequence (follow-up).

Scope

In: page, rubric adaptation, scoring, Gumroad listing copy draft, free-resources entry, router-quiz destination addition. Out: Gumroad listing creation (Kevin), hub sequence seed (follow-up), any storage/backend (none exists by design), FootballGPT app changes.

Never-list

Standard voice rules; no claims about talent ID or predicting ability (this is a development-focus tool, not a scouting verdict); nothing implying data about the child is collected.

Proof before Shipped

Live 200; scoring traced for 3 rating combinations; grep sweeps clean; rubric text checked against the Compass source for fidelity.

Note (mirrored into this repo 2026-07-25): this PRD is owned and tracked canonically in 360tft-hub/docs/prd/, per the Hub_ prefix and the PRD Naming & Per-Product Queues convention in that repo’s CLAUDE.md. It is copied here only so this repo’s pre-commit Gate 1-3 PRD check has a local artefact to point at, since the implementation (player-diagnostic/index.html) lives in this repo (360tft/360tft) while the PRD process lives in the hub. Treat the hub copy as the source of truth for status changes.

Expected Experience

• Job: a coach rates one player across 11 areas in about five minutes and leaves with a named strength and a named development focus for the next session.
• Peak moment: the result screen naming the player’s strongest area and biggest development focus, each with one concrete action.
• Visual bar: matches the site’s established layout: null quiz pattern, directly reusing the visual language and rating-button mechanic of coaches-compass/day-1/index.html (same palette, same card structure).
• Copy bar: helpful peer voice, no hype, explicit no-names/nothing-stored privacy framing stated on the page itself, not just implied.
• Never-list: no talent ID or scouting-grade claims, no invented assessment science, no suggestion that any player data is collected or stored.
• Proof required: live 200 on /player-diagnostic/; scoring hand-traced for 3+ rating combinations; every rubric line checked against the Compass Day 1 source it was adapted from; grep sweeps clean.
• Shareable test: n/a by design — this tool is explicitly private (no share card), which is itself the point (see Honesty artifact).
• Embarrassment test: no claim on the page is unverifiable or invented — pass (every rubric line traces to the Compass source; every result line is generated from the coach’s own ratings).

Honesty artifact

Stated assumptions (decided during implementation, not spelled out in the PRD body above):

• Rubric text is adapted from coaches-compass/day-1/index.html (this repo, branch auto/coaches-compass-relaunch, not yet merged at time of writing): all 11 items (4 technical, 3 tactical, 2 physical, 2 mental) and the four-point rating scale carried over unchanged in structure, with question and example text rewritten from team-plural (“do players panic…”) to individual-singular (“does this player panic…”) language. No new assessment categories or criteria were invented. Chose the higher-scoring category as “strongest” and the lower-scoring category as “development focus” using the same Math.round(average) approach as the Day 1 diagnostic, extended with a max/min reduce instead of Day 1’s min-only reduce (Day 1 only surfaces the lowest category; this tool surfaces both ends since the PRD asks for “strongest area” too).
• The four “Focus” action paragraphs (one per category) are adapted from Day 1’s own “Next 7 days” recommendation bullets, rewritten from team instructions to individual-player language, not fabricated new coaching content. The four “Strongest area” notes are new short paragraphs written to explain what a category-leading score means for that player, since Day 1 has no equivalent “your team’s strongest area” copy to adapt (Day 1 only ever surfaces the weakest category) — flagging this one block as original-but-consistent-with-source rather than a direct adaptation.
• No share card was built. The PRD’s Never-list requires “nothing implying data about the child is collected”; a public share/copy feature for a named player’s result would cut against the explicit no-names/nothing- stored privacy framing the PRD requires, so it was left out rather than guessed at. Flagging in case Kevin wants a genuinely anonymous share option later (e.g. “I just diagnosed a player’s development focus with 360TFT” with no scores attached).
• Router-quiz destination addition (PRD’s “in scope” list) was NOT done. The parent task explicitly instructed: never touch which-product/ (owned by a sibling PR), and that instruction overrides the PRD’s own scope where the two conflict. Flagging for whichever PR currently owns which-product/ to add /player-diagnostic/ as a routing destination.
• Added a free-resources.md entry (in scope, not excluded by the parent task’s do-not-touch list) linking to the new page.

Known gaps (explicitly out of scope for this PR):

• No Gumroad listing created (Kevin’s action, per PRD scope). Listing copy drafted at docs/gumroad-listings/player-diagnostic.md.
• No hub nurture sequence for gumroad:player-diagnostic-sheet claims (follow-up once the listing exists, per PRD scope).
• No analytics event firing: same pre-existing, site-wide gtag-loader gap documented in the which-product/, coaches-compass/, and time-audit/ PRDs. UTM params on the outbound FootballGPT link are the only campaign-attribution signal available.
• No local Jekyll build run (no ruby/bundle/jekyll on this machine). Verified instead with node scripts/manual-html-validator.js and manual front-matter/permalink comparison against working layout: null pages.