Flaws of Potential Ability

First of all, let me make myself clear that I believe that the CA/PA is the right way to do things.

But I think there's just something wrong with the PA and the way players develop.

First of all, let me define PA, as I understand it since my whole post will revolves around it.

PA is basically THE BEST THAT A PLAYER CAN BE. Assuming a player has had the PERFECT upbrining:

- Best coach

- Best Training

- Best playing experience

- No injuries

He will reach his PA, correct?

Now...I was thinking about those players whose PA is below 100. How good do you think this PA suggest? Is it League 2 level? Or Conference level?

What really bugs me is the thought of a 17 year old whose PA is below 100. That means, if this particular 17 year old, was trained by Man Utd, play for Man Utd, week-in week-out, receive no injuries, he will not improve beyond the PA of 100?

Surely, if you take an average 17 year old, and gives him that, he'd be at least a championship level player.

It doesn't matter if it WILL happen or not. What matters is IF it happens, because that's what the PA is about. IF a player receives the perfect upbringing, how far will he go?

I'd just like to hear what you guys think. Think, if YOU were the 17 year old. And you trained with the best and played with the best and never suffered any major injury, how good will YOU be? I'm pretty sure you'll be better than a league 2 player.

Oh dear. I'm hiding now before the debate starts (I agree, but i'm not getting into this discussion again!!)

I dont think its enough to simply assume that becasue a player is trained by Man U he will be better than his potential indicates. With your reasoning one could assume that if I was trained by Man U then I would magically gain good ball control and become a decent player. I would think that it actually works the other way around, the player prooves himself to be a decent player with decent potential before he is signed by Man Utd, but I do agree that a club with Man Us coaching staff should produce more quality youngsters than they actually do.

If I was trained by Manchester United from the age of 3 I'd still not be worthy of even playing for a Faroese 2nd division team when I reached 23!

If you keep a close eye on the Man U youth squad in real life, you'll see most of them 'graduate' to lower league if they stay in football at all.

Originally posted by glamdring:

If I was trained by Manchester United from the age of 3 I'd still not be worthy of even playing for a Faroese 2nd division team when I reached 23!

Surely that's more to do with natural talent though.

I think we both had this debate before and differed on that occasion My suggestion was that players should be less likely to achieve their PA depending on the club they are with, rather than being able to surpass their PA.

I.e. there are two kevin Nolans both with PA of 180, the one playing for Man Utd, winning champuionships, making internaitonal appearances and playing in Europe should have the ability to achieve his full PA. The other still at Bolton would have a cap on his ability to achieve full PA because of the level of football he is playing and the lack of progression etc.

Beign able to surpass PA is maybe not the way to go.

Originally posted by Nomis07:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by glamdring:

If I was trained by Manchester United from the age of 3 I'd still not be worthy of even playing for a Faroese 2nd division team when I reached 23!

Surely that's more to do with natural talent though.

I think we both had this debate before and differed on that occasion My suggestion was that players should be less likely to achieve their PA depending on the club they are with, rather than being able to surpass their PA.

I.e. there are two kevin Nolans both with PA of 180, the one playing for Man Utd, winning champuionships, making internaitonal appearances and playing in Europe should have the ability to achieve his full PA. The other still at Bolton would have a cap on his ability to achieve full PA because of the level of football he is playing and the lack of progression etc.

Beign able to surpass PA is maybe not the way to go. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hmmmm If Bolton are in the Prem are they not already playing the same level of football week in week out albeit not quite as successfully?

I agree that the club should impact greatly on whether or not a player reaches his PA but due to the coaching levels, training ground and maybe a little to do with the players he plays with.

Originally posted by Cometdude:

Hmmmm If Bolton are in the Prem are they not already playing the same level of football week in week out albeit not quite as successfully?

I think the level of football, ability of players you're playing with etc will have an impact on it. I don't think Micahel Carrick would be as good as he is now if he had stayed with Spurs and I think gareth Barry would improve if he played for Liverpool rather than Villa.

Originally posted by Nomis07:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Cometdude:

Hmmmm If Bolton are in the Prem are they not already playing the same level of football week in week out albeit not quite as successfully?

I think the level of football, ability of players you're playing with etc will have an impact on it. I don't think Micahel Carrick would be as good as he is now if he had stayed with Spurs and I think gareth Barry would improve if he played for Liverpool rather than Villa. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yep I agree there, but so long as its based on the players ability that he plays with and not soley on club REP. but I still think that the clubs coaches and training facilities should have a greater impact on a players PA. ( so long as they are playing regular 1st team football )

Originally posted by Cometdude:

Yep I agree there, but so long as its based on the players ability that he plays with and not soley on club REP. but I still think that the clubs coaches and training facilities should have a greater impact on a players PA. ( so long as they are playing regular 1st team football )

Definately, if Barry moves to Liverpool and they finish 12th for the next 3 years whilst Villa finish 4th for the next three years, he should not improve drastically in ability. European football, quality of football, quality of team, success as player and player in team and international recognition should influence it before club rep.

you say that the club has an effect on the player, but le tissier was a great player despite not playing european football, never winning the league etc

Originally posted by htygyr:

you say that the club has an effect on the player, but le tissier was a great player despite not playing european football, never winning the league etc

He could arguably have been better given all that though.

I don't get the OP's argument, on the one hand you say you agree with the CA/PA system, then say that players should be able to exceed their PA. It just doesn't make sense for that to happen.

The only possible issue here is that Man Utd and the like should be more capable of spotting talent at an earlier age (high PA) and should have less dross coming through their youth ranks. As pointed out though, even then the majority of their youth players will forge lower league, not premier league careers.

The key thing for me is that no-one ever knows a players 'PA' in real life. It's only an issue in FM if you use any tool to find out what it is, it's meant to be a hidden stat.

Originally posted by htygyr:

you say that the club has an effect on the player, but le tissier was a great player despite not playing european football, never winning the league etc

I'm not saying that a small club cannot create a great player, but I think it's safe to say that if Le Tissier had played for Barcelona he would have been an even better player.

This is why playing the game beyond 2020 sucks because it doesnt reflect the reality.

But this is a video game... expecting a 100% reality simulation is damn near impossible (at least at this time).

There are a lot of great players who come from lesser known clubs. Sure there are great players from small club in FM too, but they wont reach like 195 PA.

Rather off topic, I think we should have different CA/PA for Mental, Technical and Physical attributes imo

Originally posted by coldcell:

Rather off topic, I think we should have different CA/PA for Mental, Technical and Physical attributes imo

At first I thought that was a good shout, but IMO anyone who takes notice of that much detail in their game wouldn't bother with genie scouts etc and so wouldn't know what the PA/CA's are.

Originally posted by Kawee:

PA is basically THE BEST THAT A PLAYER CAN BE. Assuming a player has had the PERFECT upbrining:

- Best coach

- Best Training

- Best playing experience

- No injuries

He will reach his PA, correct?

Now...I was thinking about those players whose PA is below 100. How good do you think this PA suggest? Is it League 2 level? Or Conference level?

He obviously has a big greasy sausage and bacon bap on his way to training, A mCdonalds on the way home from training (moaning about them discontinuing supersize meals, has his fatty dinner his mum cooks him (Turkey twizzler's, chips lots of sauce), goes to the chippy on the way round to his mates, gets large fish and chips with plenty of scraps and lots of salt and vinegar......and 3 battered mars bars, has a few games of pro evo at his mates whilst munching a bag of 'broken biscuits', has a few naughty smokes with his mate and gets the munchies, has more scoffs, tub of ice cream. Falls asleep, wakes up hungry, goes downstairs and raids the fridge, mum hasnt been shopping left so he eats the lard.......

.....cycle continues......goes out and gets smashed 4 times a week too.

( :

If you keep a close eye on the Man U youth squad in real life, you'll see most of them 'graduate' to lower league if they stay in football at all.

But their upbringing wasn't PERFECT was it? For it to be perfect they must have played for Man Utd in the EPL and in the UCL.

Maximum exposure + good training + luck with injury = reaching PA.

My main argument is, is it realistic to limit any youngster to a PA of less than 100?

I just think that any youngster, if they received the perfect upbringing would be pretty good, right?

Originally posted by Kawee:

I just think that any youngster, if they received the perfect upbringing would be pretty good, right?

Well no, I don't agree with that. There has to be an element of natural talent that will differ from player to player and not necessarily take that player above 100 CA/PA.

Originally posted by Nomis07:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by glamdring:

If I was trained by Manchester United from the age of 3 I'd still not be worthy of even playing for a Faroese 2nd division team when I reached 23!

Surely that's more to do with natural talent though.

I think we both had this debate before and differed on that occasion My suggestion was that players should be less likely to achieve their PA depending on the club they are with, rather than being able to surpass their PA.

I.e. there are two kevin Nolans both with PA of 180, the one playing for Man Utd, winning champuionships, making internaitonal appearances and playing in Europe should have the ability to achieve his full PA. The other still at Bolton would have a cap on his ability to achieve full PA because of the level of football he is playing and the lack of progression etc.

Beign able to surpass PA is maybe not the way to go. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm definitely of the opinion that PA is not ideal, but I disagree with the original point about basically anyone training with Manchester United having the potential to become world class.

I always find it frustrating that the PA of your players is set in stone at the moment they exit your youth team and move into your U19s. I don't use 3rd party programmes so I don't know what any of these PAs are, but it is still disheartening to know that probably all your summer's young players are already doomed to failure whatever you do with them because they all have very low PA

Progression of CA up towards PA is obviously the issue, but is an extremely difficult thing to get right when mixing all the various inputs to that equation.

Funny you should pick my favourite (English) player for your example though! I like to believe that a player at Bolton could progress to his maximum potential, but I guess you are right that training with higher calibre players day in day out and maybe better coaches can make a big difference. I think it may well do in FM already though, just not to that extent. I've had players who seem to have peaked at my club, then they go on to a "bigger" club and suddenly develop further

I've long thought PA was just a flawed, and false, system.

Progression should be more natural, and should happen organically:

The better a player is playing in matches the more he should progress. This particularly.

The harder he is working in training the more he should progress.

The better the coaching/facilities he is getting the more he should progress.

So we have two players. Both start with identical stats.

One is a Striker for Middlesbrough. He's driven, a hard working model professional. And he's kicking ass in the Premiership, and scoring plenty of goals.

One is a striker for Man U. He's relaxed, undetermined, and a little bit lazy. He's not getting into his Man U squad much, except domestic cup matches. And he's playing poorly.

The Boro lad should improve a LOT.

The Man U lad should improve none or little.

Clubs would then go after the Boro lad, while the Man U lad rots into obscurity.

As above WHY DO WE NEED PA?...

----------------------

It's always annoyed me when I've had a striker performing at the very top level in the top leagues in Europe and HE DOES NOT IMPROVE. While some donkey elsewhere is shooting up, while doing nothing, because he's got a 180 PA.

This way also personalities and determination would be a major factor, like they are in real life. And we'd see an end to players with awesome stats and a 1 determination. Personalities would *actually mean something*.

If you remove PA, which I do agree is flawed in certain areas, how do you recommend SI to implement a new variable that specifies the natural talent in a player? You cannot say Messi or rooney or any other young star should have the same development process?

That is why we need PA. The only alternative would be to have everyone's PA set at the maximum but put in several factors that affect the speed at which the player matures, but even then you're going to have problems with young stars since if they continue at the rate they start off with when they are 17-21, then they should be perfect by 26. You can't exactly slow them down later either since it wouldn't be fair... you can't implement a "peak early / lasting" sort of system like in PES because you can never know when a player will start to relapse etc.

So i'm afraid PA is the best solution there is and has worked considerably well till now

Originally posted by Azmodai:

If you remove PA, which I do agree is flawed in certain areas, how do you recommend SI to implement a new variable that specifies the natural talent in a player? You cannot say Messi or rooney or any other young star should have the same development process?

Messi performed exceptionally well in matches, at a very high level, and no doubt worked his balls off in training.

But I do concede your point that with two players, one the very young Messi, one an identical player at the same club, you'd want certain players to have something intagible to BE ABLE to seperate themself. Even if they played at the same level.

Off the top off my head I'd make another hidden attribute, like Consistency, and call it say NATURAL ABILITY. Rate it out of 20. And players would have thier improvements skewed by this.

You might call it "PA by another name" but I wouldn't.

First of all, players would need to perform and train hard PRIMARILY, this would just be a knock on effect. Currently PA does not work like that. It's the horse before the cart - the difference between CA - PA determining the improvement primarily.

And secondly, perhaps much more importantly, *I would not allow Scouts to see NATURAL ABILITY*. It's something that affects the players development, but can't be seen, except through seeing how the player improves because of it.

Currently everyone and his wife can see PA and the computer just makes decisions, and scouts reports, almost solely based on it.

Let's see performances and improvements as the true measure of what a scout sees. Not some hidden stat they shouldn't even be privy too.

And PA has "worked considerably well"? I have to object to that Azmodai. And besides, you don't improve by standing still. I might say that's been SI's problem the last 3/4 years.

(See my "Regens - how bad they still are" thread at the top of the board for further, but related, evidence).

If i had been trained by man u since i was a kid never got injured and played european competitions i dont think my PA would be over 4 as i have no natural talent so you cant limit it to 100

Originally posted by mikeytwigge:

If i had been trained by man u since i was a kid never got injured and played european competitions i dont think my PA would be over 4 as i have no natural talent so you cant limit it to 100

All the responses like such are irrelevant. You'd never be picked to be part of the Man U youth system. Players with some talent would be. If Man U say nothing in them they wouldn't be there. Same with every other club.

Players who are part of the Man U youth system should be beyond the level of the best players most of us played with as a kid.

this matter could be changed slightly without having to completely overhaul the C.A./P.A. system.

first of all keep C.A. i dont really see any major flaws in this atm.

then instead of having a defined P.A. give everyone a negative P.A. like the youth players have. this would mean that you could have someone trained at Man U at the top of their P.A. barrier while someone trained at Cambridge (no offence) at the bottom of their P.A. barrier.

i dont think this would be the great answer that everyone is hoping for but i do think it is a slight change that could improve the system. i do think that player's performance should effect how they turn out but it may be hard to differ between form and class in this case.

Originally posted by JohnShaft:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">

If you keep a close eye on the Man U youth squad in real life, you'll see most of them 'graduate' to lower league if they stay in football at all.

But their upbringing wasn't PERFECT was it? For it to be perfect they must have played for Man Utd in the EPL and in the UCL. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Arguing that a player with a PA of <100 could have done better if they'd been given Champions League football is like arguing that your local amateur team could win the FA Cup if they reached the final.

The reason they didn't get to play in the EPL and the UCL is because they weren't good enough, and never would have been. Numerous players that had limited opportunities as youngsters nevertheless earned themselves the right to play regularly in the Premiership. And plenty of players showing early promise that earned them first team opportunities then ceased to develop.

Compare, for example, the career trajectories of Ian Wright and Ian Selley. One played Sunday League football until the age 22 and became one of the best strikers in the country; the other made 42 appearances for the Arsenal first team between the ages of 18 and 21 before finding his level in non-league football.

Originally posted by JohnShaft:

So we have two players. Both start with identical stats.

One is a Striker for Middlesbrough. He's driven, a hard working model professional. And he's kicking ass in the Premiership, and scoring plenty of goals.

One is a striker for Man U. He's relaxed, undetermined, and a little bit lazy. He's not getting into his Man U squad much, except domestic cup matches. And he's playing poorly.

The Boro lad should improve a LOT.

The Man U lad should improve none or little.

Clubs would then go after the Boro lad, while the Man U lad rots into obscurity.

And secondly, perhaps much more importantly, *I would not allow Scouts to see NATURAL ABILITY*. It's something that affects the players development, but can't be seen, except through seeing how the player improves because of it.

Currently everyone and his wife can see PA and the computer just makes decisions, and scouts reports, almost solely based on it.

Let's see performances and improvements as the true measure of what a scout sees. Not some hidden stat they shouldn't even be privy too.

Some of these (like the likelihood of a player continuing to develop physically, or the existence of a bad habit they're unlikely to be able to eradicate) can be assessed quite easily. And whilst other qualities are harder to spot, it is possible to evaluate to what extent players performances rely on what they have been trained to produce and what comes naturally.

I'd warrant a top scout can judge with reasonable accuracy which of the better U16s at a top club definitely won't make it and which of the weaker ones nevertheless stand a chance of Premiership football.

I'd agree that the ability of scouts to predict potential is a little too high, but if scouting really takes months to work then you're going to need a long time in game time to make any decisions, which reduces playability.

Originally posted by JohnShaft:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mikeytwigge:

If i had been trained by man u since i was a kid never got injured and played european competitions i dont think my PA would be over 4 as i have no natural talent so you cant limit it to 100

All the responses like such are irrelevant. You'd never be picked to be part of the Man U youth system. Players with some talent would be. If Man U say nothing in them they wouldn't be there. Same with every other club.

Players who are part of the Man U youth system should be beyond the level of the best players most of us played with as a kid. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Actually they're not irrelevant. Because in FM I can sign someone who is slightly below the level of the best players I played with as a kid (a weaker member of a Conference National youth side) for the Man Utd youth system. Should that individual have an ability to consistently improve to at least Championship standard? Should every reasonably professional player that is slightly better than their peers at 16 be a guaranteed first team star provided they avoid serious injury get first team football?

A monkey (and most of us) will never understand quantum physics regardless of the training. Likewise, some players will never become Ronaldo.

CA should be kept, but I think instead of PA, SI should implement "natural talent" which would mean that a player with higher "natural talent" would respond better to training. This would be a PERCENTAGE with 100% meaning they will be a world class player assuming perfect training/luck with injuries etc.

Now let's take a player with 50%. With the right training and good performances, the player can be become a world class player but he has a lesser chance of becoming world class because he has half the talent the other player had- but it should still be a possibility.

A player with 1% doesn't mean there's a 1% chance the player will be world class. The scale would downgrade so a player with 1% would be EXTREMELY unlikely to ever improve.

1-10%= unlikely to improve

20-40%= will slightly improve. Still there is a remote possibility that a world class player will be produced.

40-50%= average academy player for Man U, for instance. They will likely improve a significant amount but not beyond L1/Championship level. Some may be lucky and become premier-quality players.

50-70%= very good talents, quite the possibility that they can develop into first-teamers. Then again, they could flop but they are LESS LIKELY to flop than the players with lower percents.

80%+= unusual talents like Vela, Bojan, Anderson... essentially the -10s. I think Bojan would have the highest percent in the game.

These percents would apply to both youth and regular players. If you think a player will not improve, give them a lower percent. If you think they can, regardless of age, give them a higher percent.

What this does: it means that players aren't ensured to be stars. Yes, Bojan seems amazing, but he could flop. It would be unlikely, but still possible using percentages- just like in real life.

Also:

-training is much more important because players with high percents respond better to good training. Also, lower percentage players have a better chance to improve.

-The game is more random; you can't buy the same player every time and expect it to always work.

-old players won't automatically deteriorate if trained well. Obviously, most will have lower percents than an equally talented 18 year old.

Please evaluate this; I see no faults with it. Remember that the percents represent capacity to improve, they aren't a fixed potential.

Originally posted by Scott1990:

CA should be kept, but I think instead of PA, SI should implement "natural talent" which would mean that a player with higher "natural talent" would respond better to training. This would be a PERCENTAGE with 100% meaning they will be a world class player assuming perfect training/luck with injuries etc.

Now let's take a player with 50%. With the right training and good performances, the player can be become a world class player but he has a lesser chance of becoming world class because he has half the talent the other player had- but it should still be a possibility.

A player with 1% doesn't mean there's a 1% chance the player will be world class. The scale would downgrade so a player with 1% would be EXTREMELY unlikely to ever improve.

1-10%= unlikely to improve

20-40%= will slightly improve. Still there is a remote possibility that a world class player will be produced.

40-50%= average academy player for Man U, for instance. They will likely improve a significant amount but not beyond L1/Championship level. Some may be lucky and become premier-quality players.

50-70%= very good talents, quite the possibility that they can develop into first-teamers. Then again, they could flop but they are LESS LIKELY to flop than the players with lower percents.

80%+= unusual talents like Vela, Bojan, Anderson... essentially the -10s. I think Bojan would have the highest percent in the game.

These percents would apply to both youth and regular players. If you think a player will not improve, give them a lower percent. If you think they can, regardless of age, give them a higher percent.

What this does: it means that players aren't ensured to be stars. Yes, Bojan seems amazing, but he could flop. It would be unlikely, but still possible using percentages- just like in real life.

Also:

-training is much more important because players with high percents respond better to good training. Also, lower percentage players have a better chance to improve.

-The game is more random; you can't buy the same player every time and expect it to always work.

-old players won't automatically deteriorate if trained well. Obviously, most will have lower percents than an equally talented 18 year old.

Please evaluate this; I see no

faults with it. Remember that the percents represent capacity to improve, they aren't a fixed potential.

I'm not sure there is too much difference between this and PA (if you multiply the % by 2), just slightly less rigidity. In any case, if you don't look at PA, the problem isn't there. Some players simply will not progress however much quality training they get. I think the current system is fine in concept, just needs tiny tweaks.

One of the most overlooked factors is that it makes straightforward comparisons between current players, where players might be in 10 years and the newgens coming through.

This allows for databases and newgen generators to be readily compared and updated across different leagues, games, seasons and iterations of the FM software.

Other systems allow for training/match scheduling exploits/bugs to produce bizarre anomalies such as young real-life players with decent CA but obviously restrictive limitations continuing to grow until they are far better than the first team, or a world where no regens are fit to lace the boots of an average Premiership player.

Besides, the Maldinis and Ronaldos of this world aren't "more responsive to training" than the Phil Nevilles and Owen Hargreaves'. They're simply better. And the probability of 99.999999% of people that have ever been paid to kick a football of reaching the level of performance of the first two is a big fat zero.

I'm not sure there is too much difference between this and PA (if you multiply the % by 2), just slightly less rigidity. In any case, if you don't look at PA, the problem isn't there. Some players simply will not progress however much quality training they get. I think the current system is fine in concept, just needs tiny tweaks.

No, it doesn't work like that. The percentage is scaled so you can't just multiply it by two. What advantage this has is that there is no set potential to a players ability; certain players have a better chance to be good and others have a lesser chance... but everyone has a chance of some sort.

I think setting a maximum limit to soneone's talent is ludicrous because we cannot predict the future like that. You can look and say "oh well Vela is a guarenteed superstar so let's give him -10 PA". OK that's great, but surely there's a chance he'll be a failure. Or even more absurd: setting the PA for players like Fabregas or Messi. There should be no limit, no cap to the amount they progress to.

Or maybe you could just accept that it is a game mechanic put in place to stop top clubs from getting all their players for free from their youth systems?

Originally posted by Scott1990: There should be no limit, no cap to the amount they progress to.

Whyever not? At some point they will reach a stage where they simply won't improve overall any longer. Same applies for Man Utd youth team players, they don't all go on to play in League 1 or so, some of them simply aren't good enough for a professional career at the end of it. The simple fact of life is that those players didn't have the potential to make it, despite being trained an Man U.

Originally posted by pelicanstuff:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Scott1990: There should be no limit, no cap to the amount they progress to.

Whyever not? At some point they will reach a stage where they simply won't improve overall any longer. Same applies for Man Utd youth team players, they don't all go on to play in League 1 or so, some of them simply aren't good enough for a professional career at the end of it. The simple fact of life is that those players didn't have the potential to make it, despite being trained an Man U. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

When I said that quote, I was referring to people with high set PAs, namely Messi and Fabregas. Obviously some players have a lower capacity to improve and won't make it.

Messi and Fabregas will stop improving at some point as well, it's not as if their talent is infinite.

Originally posted by Kawee:

First of all, let me make myself clear that I believe that the CA/PA is the right way to do things.

But I think there's just something wrong with the PA and the way players develop.

First of all, let me define PA, as I understand it since my whole post will revolves around it.

PA is basically THE BEST THAT A PLAYER CAN BE. Assuming a player has had the PERFECT upbrining:

- Best coach

- Best Training

- Best playing experience

- No injuries

He will reach his PA, correct?

Now...I was thinking about those players whose PA is below 100. How good do you think this PA suggest? Is it League 2 level? Or Conference level?

What really bugs me is the thought of a 17 year old whose PA is below 100. That means, if this particular 17 year old, was trained by Man Utd, play for Man Utd, week-in week-out, receive no injuries, he will not improve beyond the PA of 100?

Surely, if you take an average 17 year old, and gives him that, he'd be at least a championship level player.

It doesn't matter if it WILL happen or not. What matters is IF it happens, because that's what the PA is about. IF a player receives the perfect upbringing, how far will he go?

I'd just like to hear what you guys think. Think, if YOU were the 17 year old. And you trained with the best and played with the best and never suffered any major injury, how good will YOU be? I'm pretty sure you'll be better than a league 2 player.

if a player starts off at scunthorpe. he will have a PA of 120 (for example)

at scunthorpe he will only make it to CA 70.

he moves to manutd where the extra money pumped into training etc will allow him to reach 120.

i see no problem with it.

i doubt i'd be better than a conference south player even if i trained with a to p team.

Originally posted by postal postie:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kawee:

First of all, let me make myself clear that I believe that the CA/PA is the right way to do things.

But I think there's just something wrong with the PA and the way players develop.

First of all, let me define PA, as I understand it since my whole post will revolves around it.

PA is basically THE BEST THAT A PLAYER CAN BE. Assuming a player has had the PERFECT upbrining:

- Best coach

- Best Training

- Best playing experience

- No injuries

He will reach his PA, correct?

Now...I was thinking about those players whose PA is below 100. How good do you think this PA suggest? Is it League 2 level? Or Conference level?

What really bugs me is the thought of a 17 year old whose PA is below 100. That means, if this particular 17 year old, was trained by Man Utd, play for Man Utd, week-in week-out, receive no injuries, he will not improve beyond the PA of 100?

Surely, if you take an average 17 year old, and gives him that, he'd be at least a championship level player.

It doesn't matter if it WILL happen or not. What matters is IF it happens, because that's what the PA is about. IF a player receives the perfect upbringing, how far will he go?

I'd just like to hear what you guys think. Think, if YOU were the 17 year old. And you trained with the best and played with the best and never suffered any major injury, how good will YOU be? I'm pretty sure you'll be better than a league 2 player.

if a player starts off at scunthorpe. he will have a PA of 120 (for example)

at scunthorpe he will only make it to CA 70.

he moves to manutd where the extra money pumped into training etc will allow him to reach 120.

i see no problem with it.

i doubt i'd be better than a conference south player even if i trained with a to p team. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is the other point I was supposed to make in those posts, but I lost my train of thought. Thanks.

Messi and Fabregas will stop improving at some point as well, it's not as if their talent is infinite.

Yes but we aren't at the level in which we can predict that they surely will not progress past a certain level or if they will even make it to said level in the first place.

Originally posted by Scott1990:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Messi and Fabregas will stop improving at some point as well, it's not as if their talent is infinite.

Yes but we aren't at the level in which we can predict that they surely will not progress past a certain level or if they will even make it to said level in the first place. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The game's a simulation, not a device for predicting the future. As postal postie mentions above, just because a player has a set PA doesn' t mean he will reach it. And if you don't cheat by using scout or FMM to look at PA, the unknowns in the game are quite similar to real life.

OK, I have a point that I was going to make a thread about, but may as well put it in here. Now, if this has already been seen/mentioned then I apolgise.

I have Federico Fazio for my Utd side. After half a year or so at Utd I used FMM to look at the PAs of youth teamers (cheating I know, but I dont care) and I also had a look at Fazio. His PA was 152 I think. Not great, but so long as his stats were in the right place, so be it. Now, at the start of my 3rd season, I used FMM again to have a look as I didnt think some of the PAs in the list someone posted here were right. Fazios PA had risen!!! Not his CA, his PA! It has gone up to 180something. This may be an error by me, but can PAs change? If so then the OP was right and due to him being at Utd with 7star training and CL football his PA improved

Stomalomalus, as far as I know PAs don't rise so i'd say it might have been a mistake on your part, but I couldn't say for sure. If i'm wrong perhaps someone could tell us what makes a players PA rise?

Originally posted by pelicanstuff:

As postal postie mentions above, just because a player has a set PA doesn' t mean he will reach it. And if you don't cheat by using scout or FMM to look at PA, the unknowns in the game are quite similar to real life.

They're not though, that's the point.

The CPU goes afetr crap high PA players with reckless abandon, while ignoring players who are actually performing, and are positionally better.

THAT is one of the main reasons the execution of the PA system is so flawed.

That's why I recommended (with NATURAL ABILITY) that no-one gets to see it, not even the scouts/CPU.

Someone being able to see a PA of 190 in a crap 20-year-old rotting in the reserves is just utterly unrealistic and has no bearing on real life.

Someone being able too see a 20-year-old as a big talent because he is performing really well in a good league and improving a lot is UTTERLY REALISTIC.

That contrast illustrates why the current system is so flawed.

That is an interesting point on PA changing.

I have seen a few players pick up a serious injury which has reduced their PA in the past and I vaguely remember some one from SI confirming that this can happen occasionally.

I always thought that PA should reflect the absolute best a player can reach if he has the best training, plays regular competitive football and stays relatively injury free. If this system was implemented, then you would see a lot more higher rated PA players, but you would have to check their progress over time, mentality/attitude to see if they had the drive and ability to be a future star. This way you might have several high PA players on your team, but only a few of them reach their potential.

PA cannot change during the game, it's a set number.

Originally posted by Kees04:

PA cannot change during the game, it's a set number.

This is what I thought. When I get home Ill check my game using FMM, and check the editor to see whether the PAs are different. I do think his original PA is 152 though.

Originally posted by JohnShaft:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by pelicanstuff:

As postal postie mentions above, just because a player has a set PA doesn' t mean he will reach it. And if you don't cheat by using scout or FMM to look at PA, the unknowns in the game are quite similar to real life.

They're not though, that's the point.

The CPU goes afetr crap high PA players with reckless abandon, while ignoring players who are actually performing, and are positionally better.

THAT is one of the main reasons the execution of the PA system is so flawed.

That's why I recommended (with NATURAL ABILITY) that no-one gets to see it, not even the scouts/CPU.

Someone being able to see a PA of 190 in a crap 20-year-old rotting in the reserves is just utterly unrealistic and has no bearing on real life.

Someone being able too see a 20-year-old as a big talent because he is performing really well in a good league and improving a lot is UTTERLY REALISTIC.

That contrast illustrates why the current system is so flawed. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

An easier way of doing this would be to make 'Judging Potential' attribute generally less effective, both for scouts and for AI managers, especially in cases where the player doesn't play much.

A 20 year old performing well in a good league will still hit a plateau somewhere - I'm agreed it should be less easy to see, but I feel it has to be there, and that PA is the best way of doing this.

Originally posted by The Lambs:

That is an interesting point on PA changing.

I have seen a few players pick up a serious injury which has reduced their PA in the past and I vaguely remember some one from SI confirming that this can happen occasionally.

i've had a case where this happens. i had a finnish wonderkid, 20 years old, CA 154 PA 197 who was being rotated in, played in probably 1/3 of my games after a spell on loan where unfortunately he didn't get to play. He suffered a broken leg in training around January or so and was out 5 months, so when I checked his CA after the season it was 150.

I know it's not a drastic change, and I have seen screenshots where it gave a message in game that the injury will most likely lead to the player not reaching his potential, but CA can drop on promising players due to events like this.

With regards PA potentially dropping after major injuries I'm confident I remember SI saying this around 3 years ago.

Either way I find it completely plausible. You hear of it all the time in American Football, where say a Running Back gets a devastating knee injury, never has the sam speed or ability to cut, and is basically never the same player from then on.

It could be argued for major cruciate injuries for instance.

every regen in my opinion should all have the pa of 200 but si shpuld tryu and figure out that only a select few with ever reach this potential as in real life where everyone is the same they just develope diffrently

Originally posted by snowballnufc:

every regen in my opinion should all have the pa of 200 but si shpuld tryu and figure out that only a select few with ever reach this potential as in real life where everyone is the same they just develope diffrently

everyone isn't the same.